A lien of real estate that was not duly imposed may constitute defamation

A municipality imposed a lien on properties and rights due to a city tax debt, but the property owner contended that he did not have possession of the property at the time and therefore the foreclosure was unlawfully imposed and impaired his reputation.
The Court rejected the claim because the liens were duly imposed due to the fact that the property owner was aware of the debt but failed to file an objection for over ten years. A lien unduly imposed harms one's good name and may be considered defamation if sent to a third party. However, because the property owner knew of the debt, and even negotiated and conducted inquiries with municipality officials, but failed to contend that he is not the “possessor” under an objection as required by law, the debt became final and the municipality was entitled to take legal measures for collection and this does not constitute defamation.