LINCOLN, Neb. (Legal Newsline) - A real estate agent who was targeted by the Nebraska Republican Party with fliers accusing her of breaking the law when she entered a contested primary election can sue the party for defamation, the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled.
Reversing a trial court’s dismissal of the case, the state high court found that Janet Palmtag had presented enough evidence for a jury to decide whether party officials had misrepresented her record.
Janet Palmtag is a licensed real estate broker in Missouri and Nebraska. She once had an Iowa license but said she let it lapse in 2020 because she wasn’t doing much business there. Two years earlier, she paid $500 to settle Iowa regulatory claims her office had transferred trust funds incorrectly to an escrow agent without approval from all parties involved.
In 2020, Palmtag entered a Republican primary for a seat in the Nebraska Legislature. The party backed Palmtag’s opponent and in October 2020 sent mailers to more than 3,000 households stating “Janet Palmtag Broke the Law & Lost Her Real Estate License” and she “was charged with and fined for engaging in improper trust account procedures.” The mailers had a yard sign saying “Licensed Agent” with a red “REVOKED” stamp over it. The mailers also said Palmtag was “TOO IRRESPONSIBLE TO KEEP HER LICENSE.”
Palmtag sued the Nebraska Republican Party for defamation, saying the mailings falsely suggested her Iowa license had been canceled and she had committed a crime. Palmtag said she took responsibility for the trust violation as owner of the real estate firm, but it had been performed by an employee and she wasn’t aware of it until the state uncovered it in an audit.
While her real estate business revenue increased in the year after the fliers were distributed, Palmtag said she lost $100,000 in income because her personal listings declined.
A trial court dismissed the case, saying that while Palmtag had raised questions of fact about whether she had broken the law and had “lost” her license, she hadn’t presented evidence party leaders had misrepresented the incident with malice. The Iowa regulatory actions were ambiguous enough for officials to have misunderstood them, the court said.
The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed, ruling Palmtag presented enough evidence for a jury to conclude – or not – that the Republican Party had defamed her.
Ryan Hamilton, the party’s executive director, said he read Palmtag’s Iowa consent agreement and saw her license status was “canceled” on a state website. Hamilton testified he believed Palmtag was responsible for the violations, based on her signature on the order. Palmtag called his explanation “self-serving” and the Nebraska Supreme Court partially agreed.
“It is not a reasonable interpretation of the consent order that Palmtag personally committed the violation or was legally liable in her personal capacity for the violation,” the court said.