The American system of justice differs from the English system. Under the English system the loser pays the winner's court costs and attorney's fees. Under the American system the loser generally pays the court costs but not the winner's Attorney's fees. Each state has its own interpretation of this rule, and you would need to consult your state's position on it. In Connecticut you would need to have either a statute or a contract that provides for recovery of attorney's fees in order to recover them.

In Connecticut defamation is a common law tort, and not a statutory cause of action. Therefore, Connecticut residents can not recover attorney's fees for a defamation case. However, the plaintiff may be entitled to exemplary damages which can be substantial, and can more than compensate for his attorney's fees if he wins. The plaintiff may also recover damages he has already experienced as well as those that he could reasonably be expected to experience in the future from the defamatory statement.

However, all is not lost. If the defamatory statement falsely disparaged the opponant's business product or service, it may give rise to a suit for unfair trade practices. Unfair trade practices are a statutory cause of action in Connecticut. The winner can recover double, sometimes tripple damages, attorney's fee and court costs. In this scenario you would file a multi count complaint with causes of action for unfair trade practices and common law defamation as a fall back position. It is easier to win an unfair trade practices case than a common law defamation case because the statement does not need to be intentional in order to be unfair.

If you are a defendant in a defamation suit, you would not recover anything unless you file a counter claim. You may not have any factual basis for a counter claim, and filing one without a reasonable basis could result in your being subsequently sued again for vexatious litigation, another statutory cause of action that also provides for the recovery of double, simetimes tripple damages, attorney's fee and court costs.

Whether a statement is defamatory or truthful often depends on the litigants' interpretation of the statement. The plaintiff believing the statement to be defamatory could very well sue the defendant who believes it to be truthful. The ultimate decision lies with the trier of fact (judge/jury). The cost of pretrial discovery can be astronomical. I represented a plaintiff in a libel case several years ago in which the defendant was desparately trying to prove the truth of his client's statement. He filed a very broad production request for a multitude of my client's documents. He was trying to back us off the claim rather than having to comply with the demand for so many documents. We took the opposite approach and produced 164 cartons of documents, and told him to help himself. The cost of document production was expensive, but ultimately the defendant settled the case  for an  an amount satisfactory to my client