Are court decisions universally recognized? If a court rules someone true in one area, couldn't it still be considered slander/libel in another area if another court rules it as not being true?

It is a bit like saying convicted murderer vs murderer. One is claiming the conviction for murder happened (which generally correlates to the murder happening but doesn't openly claim such) while the other directly claims the murder happens. If the conviction is later overturned, does the second claim open one up to more libability for a false claim?