Background
I was let go as manager of self storage property,when new owners took over the business following a bankruptcy sale. Worked for new owners for 6 months. Worked for previous owner for 2 1/2 years. I took residence in the apartment on the property.

I had been seeking employment since being terminated, usually its not long before I am booking interviews. Not this time. Out of a hunch I posed as a potential employer to my ex place of business. I have included a link to the conversation I had with my immediate replacement.

There is mention of drugs in the fridge. I was storing unopened boxes of albuterol nebulizor mist vials; --to which I have a prescription as an asthmatic. These boxes were given to me by a tenant that was cleaning and moving from the facility. She was going to toss them. I wanted to have them around just in case. The boxes were IN THE FRIDGE OUT OF SIGHT, in the apartment that was attached to the rental office. I was required to do some training at the owners other property site, upon return I was informed they had found the medication.

I believe the new employee has information that he should not have, and in turn throwing false statements out to whomever may call to get a reference.

I have no criminal record, yet the conversation portrays me as a drug dealer and a thief...

1-Is it not this element that classifies this now as Slander Per Se?

2-Do I understand slander per se as relieving me of proving damages?

3-Do I have a case?

Here is the link the audio.


Https://www.box.com/s/7c93fb9f44fa5b3b9046 (just over 2min)

Thanks

What was the reason for your termination?

I have not listened to the audio and am basing my answer on what you posed.

What is the employee saying to other people - what he/she says to you is immaterial. Are you allowed to record conversations in your State?

Here is some great info, well stated, covering all States: Defamation, Libel, and Slander Per Se (http://www.dancingwithlawyers.com/freeinfo/libel-slander-per-se.shtml)

... 1-Is it not this element that classifies this now as Slander Per Se?

2-Do I understand slander per se as relieving me of proving damages?

3-Do I have a case?

Here is the link the the audio.


Https://www.box.com/s/7c93fb9f44fa5b3b9046 (just over 2min)

Thanks


1. I am not in a position to listen to the audio, but yes, from what you posted here, it seems like it may be defamation per se.

"... Defamation per se

The four (4) categories of slander that are actionable per se are (i) accusing someone of a crime; (ii) alleging that someone has a foul or loathsome disease; (iii) adversely reflecting on a person’s fitness to conduct their business or trade; and (iv) imputing serious sexual misconduct. Here again, the plaintiff need only prove that someone had published the statement to any third party. No proof of special damages is required ..." Defamation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libel_per_se#Defamation_per_se)

2.

"Special damages

Special damages compensate the claimant for the quantifiable monetary losses suffered by the plaintiff.[citation needed] For example, extra costs, repair or replacement of damaged property, lost earnings (both historically and in the future), loss of irreplaceable items, additional domestic costs, and so on. ..." Damages - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_damages)
I think you still have to prove that you were damaged somehow. You just don't have to be able to put a figure on the amount. You can leave that up to the jury.
3. Maybe.

First, as has been alluded to, did you have the right to record this conversation? Each state has its own rules on this (ANY question on law needs to include your general locale as laws vary by area). States fall into 2 basic categories; single person permission or 2 person permission. In a single person state only one person (needs to be aware of the recording). In a 2 person both need to be aware. So if you are in a 2 person state and you did not inform the other party that you were recording the conversation your broke the law and you cannot use that conversation in court.

Second, I will not listen to this conversation either (for several reasons). But the basic question is whether whatever he said was untrue. If he said a controlled substance was found, that would appear to be the truth. If he aid you were terminated because of it, that may also be the truth.