Yes, you can sue over a bad review if it states false facts that harm you; honest opinions and true experiences are protected.
Negative write-ups sting, yet not every harsh rating gives a path to court. This guide shows when a post crosses the line, what proof you need, and smart ways to fix the damage without turning a dust-up into a long fight.
Quick Answer, Scope, And Takeaways
You can seek relief when a reviewer publishes false claims of fact that cause loss. Pure opinions, hyperbole, and true accounts sit outside defamation law. Platforms that host reviews usually aren’t liable for what a user writes, but the original author can be. Two federal rules frame the terrain: the Consumer Review Fairness Act (bans “no-negative-review” clauses) and Section 230 (limits platform liability). Here’s what you need to win, what trips people up, and faster options that often work.
What Makes A Review Legally Actionable
Courts look for a few building blocks before a claim moves ahead. The wording can come from a Yelp post, a Google review, a Facebook comment, or a blog.
| Element | What It Means | What Courts Look For |
|---|---|---|
| False Statement Of Fact | Specific claim presented as true | Verifiable detail (dates, acts, prices, diagnoses, test results) |
| Publication | Shared with at least one other person | Public post, forum thread, mass email, or similar |
| Fault | Negligence or, for public figures, actual malice | What the poster knew or ignored when posting |
| Harm | Loss tied to the claim | Sales dip, lost leads, canceled contract, or reputational hit |
| Not Pure Opinion | Reads as fact, not loose insult | Does the wording imply hidden facts? |
Opinion Versus Fact: The Line Reviewers Cross
Calling a meal “awful” is a value judgment. Writing that “the chef used spoiled chicken on 10/4” is a factual charge. The first is protected; the second lives or dies on truth. Courts also read context: rating stars, casual tone, and vagueness lean toward opinion; precise claims and insider-style detail lean toward fact. A statement framed as opinion can still be actionable if it implies undisclosed false facts.
Who You Can Sue—And Who You Can’t
You can file against the person who posted the claim. Suits against the review site nearly always fail because federal law shields platforms from liability for user content. The safer path is to target the speaker, not the host. If the post sits on a site with a clear flagging tool, use it; many hosts remove posts that include slurs, doxxing, private data, or clear factual fabrications. Anonymous posters can be unmasked with court process.
What The Law Says About Review Rights
Gag clauses inside form contracts (like “no one may post a critical review”) are void. Congress passed the Consumer Review Fairness Act to stop those terms, and the FTC’s CRFA page explains what’s banned. Hosting sites get broad protection for user-generated text under federal law limiting suits against platforms.
Proof You’ll Need Before You Even Draft A Complaint
Start with a simple file: screenshots with timestamps, links, and a copy of the profile page. Log business metrics that moved after the post: leads, bookings, average order value, or churn. Add any chat or email that shows the poster knew the claim was wrong or refused a fair correction. Finally, gather records that address the core allegation—service logs, test reports, invoices, or staff notes. Tie each record to a line in the post.
Real-World Examples Of Actionable Versus Safe Speech
Claims That Often Survive A Motion To Dismiss
Specific, checkable charges tied to a date, a product batch, or an event can reach a jury. “The clinic billed me for a service I never received on 6/2 and refused a refund after three written requests,” if false, fits the mold. Broad insults rarely do, unless they smuggle in fake facts.
Claims That Usually Fail
Loose insults, star ratings without details, and vague rants rarely meet the bar. So do posts that fairly recount a real experience, even when the tone is harsh. Fair comment matters; courts don’t police taste.
When A Lawsuit Is A Bad Bet
Even winning a case can be slow and pricey. If your claim is weak, you risk fee-shifting under state anti-SLAPP laws, plus press that reprints the claim you hoped to bury. A legal win with low damages may still leave you behind after costs.
Practical Ways To Fix Or Reduce The Damage
Flag Or Report Clear Rule Breaks
Posts with hate speech, doxxing, or private health data violate site rules. So do reviews that target the wrong business or admit a conflict of interest. Use the platform’s report path with screenshots and brief notes that point to the rule.
Ask For A Fair Edit
A calm, short message works best: thank them for the detail, share one or two records that clear up the claim, and invite an edit. Don’t send threats or legal jargon. If the post rings true but harsh, offer to fix the issue and ask whether they’ll update the rating after the fix. Keep messages short and civil.
Reply Publicly, Once
A single, cool reply signals that you take feedback seriously. Own any real miss, share a fix path, and move on. Don’t argue point-by-point in public; that keeps the thread alive and can feed the “Streisand effect.”
Rebuild With New Proof
Ask recent buyers to leave honest feedback. Share case-specific proof in your listings—before/after photos (with consent), time-stamped service logs, or quality badges. Spread fresh, verifiable signals so one noisy post loses weight.
Close Variants Matter: Suing Over A Negative Review—Rules And Risks
This section lines up the moving parts when you push a claim forward.
| Path | Upside | Trade-Offs |
|---|---|---|
| Demand Letter | Fast, low cost; may prompt a fix or removal | Can backfire if tone is over-the-top; may spark a post about the letter |
| Anti-SLAPP Motion (If You’re The Reviewer) | Early exit; fee-shifting can curb weak suits | Applies only in states with such statutes; deadlines are tight |
| Defamation Suit | Court order and damages if you prove falsity, fault, and harm | Long timeline, high cost, press risk, discovery burdens |
| Platform Takedown | Quick when a rule was broken (privacy, hate speech, impersonation) | No relief for true, harsh opinions; host decides |
| Reputation Campaign | Dilutes one post with many fresh signals | Needs steady effort; no instant fix |
How Courts Read Mixed Posts
Many posts mix opinion with fact. Judges pull out lines that assert facts and test those alone. If the factual core is true, the claim fails. If the factual core is false and the writer knew or ignored red flags, the claim can survive.
Damages: Proving Actual Loss
Track the “before and after.” Pull monthly revenue, lead counts, ad spend, and conversion rates for the six months before the post and the six months after. Tag other events that might explain changes (season shifts, promo spikes). Tie a drop to the claim with dates and screenshots. Courts like numbers, not vibes.
Public Figure Twist
If you or your brand live in the public eye, you face a higher bar: actual malice. That means the poster knew the claim was false or had serious doubts and posted anyway. The standard is tough by design. Public attention brings both praise and sharp critique; the law leaves more room for the latter.
When You Should Call Counsel
Reach out when a post states a fake fact that can be disproved with records, repeats across platforms, or links your name to crime, fraud, or health claims. Bring your log of proof and losses. Ask about venue, statute limits, and fee-shift risks. A short consult can save months of churn.
DIY Checklist Before You Sue
Collect Evidence
Save the post, the profile, and any edits. Archive the page. Keep originals in a lossless format. Add server logs or security footage if those answer the core claim.
Verify Falsity
Line up invoices, service tickets, lab reports, or photos. If the claim could be true, find a neutral record that answers it. Truth ends the case.
Map Damages
Show dates and numbers. Link the drop to the post, not hunches. If another event matches the timeline better, your case weakens. Track dates and sources.
Check Anti-SLAPP Rules
Some states let a reviewer ask for early dismissal and fees when a suit targets speech on public issues. Miss a deadline and you lose that tool. File in the right court and mind local rules.
Frequently Missed Nuances
Silencing Clauses Backfire
Don’t slip “no bad reviews” into contracts. Those terms are void, and trying to enforce them can trigger agency action. Stick to clear service terms and a fair complaint route.
The Platform Isn’t Your Target
Suing a host rarely works due to federal immunity for user speech. Focus on the speaker or use site rules to flag posts that break clear standards.
Opinions With A False Core
“In my opinion, the dentist committed fraud” reads like opinion but implies an undisclosed fact. Courts treat that as a factual charge. If it’s false, it can be actionable.
Bottom Line For Business Owners And Reviewers
You can go to court when a post states a false, harmful claim of fact. Opinions and true stories are safe. Start with proof, weigh cost and PR, use platform tools, and seek legal advice when the record backs you. The link above outlines a federal guardrail that shapes this space: the FTC’s page on gag clauses.