372 results for 'cat:"Defamation"'.
J. Newbern recommends that the defendant company's dismissal motion be granted in this lawsuit brought by a small business owner alleging libel and trademark infringement. The pro se plaintiff fails to state a plausible claim for relief against the defendant company, Alphabet, and the complaint should be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6).
Court: USDC Middle District of Tennessee , Judge: Newbern, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv52, NOS: Copyrights - Property Rights, Categories: Civil Procedure, Trademark, defamation
J. Calabrese denies the sanitary napkin company's motion for partial judgment on the pleadings, ruling the magazine's affirmative defense of apportionment of any special damages may proceed because it is not the only periodical to publish the allegedly defamatory letter about heavy metals contained in the napkins. Therefore, if special damages are eventually awarded, the magazine may seek to apportion the damage between itself and the Wisconsin magazine because the publications did not share readership.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Calabrese, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv376, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Damages, defamation
J. Silver rules a portable generator box company may pursue defamation claims against a competitor. The company sufficiently showed in court that the competitor, the largest manufacturer of generators worldwide, launched a boycott to convince retailers to stop selling its products.
Court: USDC Arizona, Judge: Silver, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv726, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: Negligence, defamation
J. Tijerina finds that the lower court properly denied the real estate broker's motion to dismiss the defamation countersuit filed by the board of directors for a realtor association. The appellant failed to show that the Texas Citizens Participation Act applied to the countersuit. Accordingly, the ruling to deny his dismissal motion was appropriate. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Tijerina, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 13-23-00176-CV, Categories: Anti-slapp, Civil Procedure, defamation
J. Longoria finds that the lower court properly denied the appellant's motion to dismiss the defamation claims against her pursuant to the Texas Citizens Participation Act. The Act applies, as the communications at issue, which include certain social media posts, are "a matter of public concern." However, the appellee adequately established a prima facie case for his claims, and the appellant fails to show that the statements were protected under the broadcaster privilege. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Longoria, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 13-22-00146-CV, Categories: Civil Procedure, defamation
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Strand grants Tyson Foods summary judgment in claims contending Tyson employees defamed a manager after an employee's tires had been found slashed a day following an altercation with the manager. Evidence indicated the manager had been the culprit, and a company email indicating he was no longer employed by Tyson did not constitute defamation.
Court: USDC Northern District of Iowa, Judge: Strand, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 6:22cv2004, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Employment, defamation
J. Seeger grants Netflix and the defendant documentarians’ motion to dismiss nearly two dozen tort, defamation, conspiracy, unjust enrichment and privacy claims brought by a woman who briefly appeared in a 2003 Kanye West music video, asking him for spare change. The woman claimed that when she appeared in the video she was at her lowest; in her complaint’s words, “broke, impoverished, disheveled, and desperate.” Clips of her from that time were included in the 2022 Netflix documentary series “Jeen-yuhs: A Kanye Trilogy,"” and she resented how she was represented in the series. However, the court finds that despite the unflattering representation, it was not materially false and thus not defamation, and further opines that she has not sufficiently alleged the rest of her claims.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Seeger, Filed On: February 27, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv2392, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: defamation, Emotional Distress, Privacy
J. Garcia finds that the lower court properly granted the appellee homeowner's dismissal motion filed pursuant to the Texas Citizens Participation Act in this case alleging defamation, abuse of process and malicious prosecution. The claims related to the appellee's right of free speech, as her communications "were made in connection with a matter of public concern." Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Garcia, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 05-23-00343-CV, Categories: Anti-slapp, Civil Procedure, defamation
J. Egan finds the trial court properly denied the former committee administrator for the Oregon Senate’s Business Housing and Finance Committee's motion to set aside a judgment and reinstate his defamation claims, which he brought against various oil companies and voluntarily dismissed in 1988. The trial court did not err when it denied the former committee administrator's motion to vacate and set aside the 1988 judgment. Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Egan, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: A178691, Categories: Civil Procedure, defamation
J. Nye denies a mother's motion to dismiss a youth hockey coach's allegations of defamation after she posted accusations that he'd engaged in sexual misconduct involving minors. The coach alleges that she did so in retaliation for him reducing her sons' playing time on the team, and that the posts led to him losing his coaching job. The coach sent her a cease and desist letter, but she continued posting allegations. The mother disputes whether the court has subject matter jurisdiction and claims the coach has not sufficiently documented his economic losses. "A jury could easily award [the coach] more than $75,000.00 in presumed damages" and the mother has not provided facts to support her claim that the coach's non-economic damages is $250,000 solely to meet the amount in controversy requirement.
Court: USDC Idaho, Judge: Nye, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv529, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: defamation
J. Bryson allows plaintiff to continue defamation claims contending coworkers falsely stated up the chain of command that plaintiff "had relapsed, was fired, and had gone crazy," which constituted a plausibly defamatory statement.
Court: USDC Delaware, Judge: Bryson, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv148, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, defamation
J. Mathias finds that the trial court properly denied a wife a restraining order in claims stemming from a dissolution of marriage because statements about alleged criminal conduct that her husband made to her employer would cause damage only if proven to be true. Should the wife be damaged by the husband's prior or future statements, she may sue him for defamation at that time. Affirmed.
Court: Indiana Court Of Appeals, Judge: Mathias, Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: 23A-DC-1954, Categories: Family Law, defamation, Restraining Order
J. Blacklock finds that the court of appeals improperly ruled against a newspaper publisher in a defamation case brought by a local prosecutor. The prosecutor alleged in his complaint that the newspaper falsely accused him of assisting in the wrongful prosecution of an individual. Both the trial court and court of appeals denied the newspaper’s attempt to have the case dismissed under the Texas Citizens Participation Act. Even if the article is not entirely accurate, the “gist” of it is true and is therefore protected and the case should have been dismissed. Reversed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Blacklock, Filed On: February 16, 2024, Case #: 22-0103, Categories: Anti-slapp, defamation
J. Deahl upholds the lower court's award of $500,000 in attorney fees to a journal and author who succeeded on their Anti-SLAPP motion after a Stanford professor sued them for defamation for writing an article that criticized his research. The journal and author are considered prevailing parties, as the record shows it was the lower court's hint it was planning to dismiss the suit following the Anti-SLAPP motion that led the professor to voluntarily dismiss his case two days later. Affirmed.
Court: DC Court of Appeals, Judge: Deahl, Filed On: February 15, 2024, Case #: 22-CV-0523 , Categories: Anti-slapp, defamation
J. Boyle grants seven agents of a county government their motion to dismiss allegations of emotional distress, defamation and discrimination brought by a register of deeds. Specifically, she claims the county did not assign to her the best assistant and that it has discriminated against her in some way. However, she has not provided enough information for her claim to survive and she has failed to respond to the county’s motion.
Court: USDC Eastern District of North Carolina, Judge: Boyle, Filed On: February 12, 2024, Case #: 5:23cv520, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, defamation, Employment Discrimination
J. Easton finds that the lower court improperly ruled for a police chief and the city legal advisor in defamation claims brought after a political candidate publicly accused them of racism and sexism because the candidate's statements constituted opinion. Reversed in part.
Court: Kentucky Court Of Appeals, Judge: Easton, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 2022-CA-1283-MR, Categories: defamation
J. Norris grants the defendant company's dismissal motion in this lawsuit alleging tortious and intentional interference with business relations, defamation and breach of contract. The plaintiff company's defamation claim fails, as its allegations "fail to raise a right to relief above the speculation level."
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Norris, Filed On: February 9, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv2093, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: defamation, Interference With Contract, Contract
J. Wright finds the trial court properly denied the dog purchaser's Consumer Protection Act-based motion to dismiss the seller's defamation counterclaim. After a dog purchase agreement soured, the purchaser filed suit for infliction of emotional distress and published allegedly defaming statements about the seller on social media. The seller's motion for sanctions is not a legal action according to the Act, which is not applicable. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Wright , Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 09-23-00214-CV, Categories: Sanctions, defamation, Contract
J. Parraguirre finds the district court properly granted the Associated Press's anti-SLAPP special motion to dismiss Steve Wynn's defamation claim against the reporter who published a story about an alleged rape committed by him. The AP met its evidentiary burden to establish its article was a good faith communication in furtherance of the right to free speech in connection with an issue of public concern. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Parraguirre , Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 85804, Categories: Anti-slapp, Communications, defamation
J. McFadden finds that the trial court properly granted the attorney's motion for attorney fees after the lawyer's defamation action against him was dismissed. The defamation action arose after the attorney filed motions for sanctions and a Bar complaint against the lawyer for allowing an unlicensed law student to conduct depositions in a case. Evidence supports the $21,000 attorney fee award. The trial court correctly found that the action lacked any justiciable issue of law or fact and did not abuse its discretion in finding that the award was reasonable. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: McFadden, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: A23A1312, Categories: defamation, Attorney Fees
J. Hurd preserves a hairstylist’s claims for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress and tortious interference with business relations that allege a beauty supply store in Schenectady, New York, falsely accused her of shoplifting and discussed the events in front of other customers, which ultimately hurt her business. She plausibly alleges the store’s allegations to local authorities were made with actual malice. The court also finds that the crime of shoplifting is considered a “serious crime” pursuant to a slander per se claim.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Hurd, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv666, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: defamation, Emotional Distress, Interference With Contract
J. Cole denies the city's motion to dismiss, ruling the position of the fire chief is a public employment position for which the employee can only be fired for cause, which creates a property interest protected by due process and allows the former chief to bring his due process claims. Furthermore, because the termination letter published by the city was written as a formal way to inform the public of its decision, statements about the chief's workplace culture and possible misconduct are "falsifiable statements of fact" that allow the chief's defamation claim to proceed.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Cole, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv230, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, defamation, Due Process
J. Russell denies a husband’s motion to dismiss this lawsuit alleging defamation and invasion of privacy. The husband’s wife had an extramarital affair with a man she met on a dating website; after she reconciled with her husband, the paramour had to get a peace order against the irate husband. After the peace order expired, the police stated to the paramour he was under investigation for circulating videos of his sexual encounters with the woman without her consent, but the allegations were later shown to be false. The husband and wife made a website to make false accusations regarding the lover and several of his friends. Since the statements were known to be false, they were made with actual malice, and the defamation and false light invasion of privacy claims persist.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Russell, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv3124, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: defamation, Privacy
J. Fuller finds that the trial court properly granted the shop owner's motion to dismiss the reviewer's libel action under Georgia's anti-SLAPP law. The action arose when the owner published a response to the reviewer's negative Google reviews, calling him a neo-Nazi who was targeting her business, harassing her and threatening to kill other shop members. The trial court correctly found that the owner's statements were protected speech. The owner's comments were made in response to review bombing initiated by the reviewer on a public forum and the reviewer conceded that he is a public figure. There is no evidence that the owner knew her statement about the supposed death threat was false or likely false. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Fuller, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: A23A1234, Categories: Anti-slapp, defamation
Per curiam, the appellate division finds that the lower court properly ordered the voting machine maker to produce redacted text messages related to the deletion of previous messages. However, the majority of the subject text messages are protected from disclosure as they discussed trial preparation and Fox has not demonstrated a substantial need for the text messages. Affirmed in part.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: 00603, Categories: defamation, Discovery, Privilege
J. Rowland grants a bank’s motion to dismiss a defamation claim brought by the former estate manager for a deceased account holder. A bank employee allegedly filed documents with a trust firm accusing the former estate manager of using her power of attorney on behalf of her mother to appoint herself as her mother’s primary estate beneficiary upon death. The former estate manager denies this is the case and claims defamation over the issue, but the court finds she has provided insufficient evidence to back up her claim.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Rowland, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv1361, NOS: Assault, Libel, & Slander - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Wills / Probate, defamation, Banking / Lending
J. Royal grants the mother's motion to proceed in forma pauperis in a civil rights and defamation action against the case worker and department director. The mother claimed she was prosecuted for cruelty to children based on false evidence and testimony provided by the case worker and director. The mother has shown she cannot pay court fees due to poverty. The mother is in debt, has three children and lives without any income or assets. However, the mother must amend her complaint because she failed to state a cognizable claim for relief with respect to the alleged civil rights violations and failed to address the status of her underlying criminal case.
Court: USDC Middle District of Georgia, Judge: Royal, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: 5:24cv18, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, defamation
J. Kyzar finds that the trial court properly granted partial summary judgment to the colonel and awarded attorney fees to the state agency in a defamation suit brought by a former member of the Louisiana State Police Commission. The award of $50,376 in fees to the agency was supported by the record when it prevailed on its motion to strike, and the former member did not show the colonel abused his "qualified privilege" in making the statements in the specified incident report or that he acted with malice or in bad faith. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Kyzar, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: CA-23-253, Categories: Civil Procedure, defamation, Attorney Fees