Steve was wrongfully terminated by Sam, his former boss at Big Flop, Inc., falsely stating that Steve embezzled money. When Steve was asked why he was no longer employed at Big Flop, Steve had to tell his new prospective employer. Under this scenario, regarding a possible claim of defamation, in a state that recognizes compelled self-publication, Sam and Big Flop:.
a) are not liable since they are protected under the law.
b) are not liable even though they lied because it was their opinion.
c) are not liable because Steve did not have any injury to his reputation.
d) are likely liable under the theory of compelled self-publication.

d) are likely liable under the theory of compelled self publication.

Explanation:

Under the theory of compelled self publication, the employee can file a claim against defamation. The term defamation refers to bringing disrepute or disregard to an employee on grounds that are untrue and based upon false information.

In such a scenario fake and untrue information is published by the employer, which results in defamation of the employee. Such fake grounds used for dismissing an employee form part of compelled self publication.

In the given case, Steve's employment has been terminated based upon false facts. If the state laws recognize compelled self publication, the employer Sam and the company Big Flop would be held liable for claim for defamatory damages payable to Steve.

answer may be d i think