In April 2005, Ronald Cedillos, an Orange County reserve sheriff's deputy, allegedly got into a shouting match at a Newport Beach restaurant with attorney Joe Cavallo. Later, Cedillos allegedly used a key to scratch Cavallo's Bentley automobile.  Michael Madigan, a private investigator who operates TwistedBadge.com, a site with the motto "our mission is to promote public awareness of the need to be vigilant in matters involving law enforcement malfeasance," reported the incident.

On May 31, 2005, Madigan received a letter from Cedillos’ attorney demanding a retraction. After Madigan refused to retract the story, Cedillos then filed a defamation action. Madigan responded with a special motion to dismiss under California's anti-SLAPP statute.

On June 22, 2007, a California appellate court affirmed the dismissal.

Mesa Airlines, which operates go! airline serving the Hawaiian islands, sued Mike Uslan, a pilot employed by rival Aloha Airlines, over postings Uslan allegedly made on the Dont Fly Go Airlines website, a blog that was critical of go!  The lawsuit asserted claims for unfair competition, trademark infringement, false advertising, and defamation.

According to filings in the case, Uslan was allegedly the founder of an organization named “Hawaii's Airline Employees Repelling Ornstein" (HERO) that sought the ouster of Jonathan Ornstein, the Chief Executive Officer of Mesa's parent company, Mesa Air Group, Inc.  

The complaint alleges that the following statements were defamatory:

• "Mesa Airlines’ employees may have been involved in a plot to murder or seriously injure a H.E.R.O member by removing the lug nuts from the member’s vehicle."  ¶ 40.
• "Mesa Airlines “cannot retain pilots because of its repeated contract violations and poor treatment of its employees.'" ¶ 43.
• "Mesa Airlines is unsafe and that Mesa Airlines’ pilot staffing in Hawaii is inadequate. ¶ 44.
• "Mesa Airlines has not supported Hawaiian communities. ¶ 45.
• "Mesa Airlines is 'dumping tickets below cost.”  ¶ 46.
• "Mesa Airlines 'abuses' its employees and that it has poor service in Hawaii due to employee turnover and dissatisfaction."  ¶ 47.
• "Mesa Airlines’ go! division ranks at the bottom of airlines in terms of complaints, lost baggage, cancellations, delays and over bookings." ¶ 48.
• "Mesa Airlines is violating Federal and Hawaii laws regarding predatory pricing." ¶ 49.
• The statement that “We should probably mention that the S.E.C., Capitol Hill, and a federal court judge aren’t happy, either.” ¶ 50.

Initially, Dont Fly Go Airlines was registered to Domains by Proxy ("DBP"), an Arizona-based website hosting company that allows content providers to remain anonymous. The website was taken down after DBP received a letter from Mesa's counsel requesting removal of content that allegedly infringed on Mesa's trademark. In November 2006, the website was reactivated in a new format. Mesa's counsel again wrote to DBP and asked for removal of the allegedly infringing content and for the names of entities or persons responsible for the site. Subsequently, DBP ceased hosting the website; and a company in China began to host the site.

On June 25, 2007, the court dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, noting that Uslan is a resident of the State of Hawaii and did not have sufficient contacts with the state of Arizon to warrant personal jurisdiction over him.

In October 2007, Jonathan Lee Riches, a federal inmate incarcerated in South Carolina, filed a lawsuit in federal court in Wyoming against celebrity blogger Mario Lavandeira. Riches has gained notoriety for bringing bizarre lawsuits (The Smoking Gun has coverage here and here). In this lawsuit, Riches claimed that Lavandeira "slandered me with hate and is distributing my copyrighted name Jonathan Lee Riches©, along with selling Anti Jonathan Lee Riches© mugs and T-shirts, stickers, buttons, hats."  The complaint also alleged that Lavandeira invaded his privacy by publishing a sex tape involving Riches on Perez Hilton. Riches requested an injunction shutting down Lavandeira's popular blog.

In December 2007, the court dismissed the case on its own motion, finding that the complaint did not state a claim and that it had no jurisdiction over the lawsuit.

Don Danks, CEO of Imergent, Inc., filed a lawsuit against Stocklemon.com and its operators, Andrew Left, Bill Harris, Alex Waynberg, and Alex Khachaturyan, alleging defamation, tortious interference with economic advantage, and violations of federal and state securities laws.  According to one press account, Danks maintained that Stocklemon posted defamatory statements about companies in order to manipulate their stock price for profit.  Danks appears to have been complaining about statements posted by website operators and anonymous users of the site, but the record is not entirely clear.  Barry K. Rothman, Danks's lawyer, said the following about the lawsuit soon after it was filed:

This litigation is intended to be a test case that will make it mandatory for principals of these self-professed consumer watchdog sites to disclose their identities, and the true identities of the fictitious names of the people who post. Most importantly this litigation is intended to be a test case that these websites have a financial motive in publishing the false and negative information they publish and they cannot hide behind Freedom of Speech and 1st Amendment Rights and we intend to have the court impose severe punitive damages against all defendants as a result of the outrageous defamation that has been published "for profit." (source)

Andrew left filed a special motion to strike the complaint based on California's anti-SLAPP law,  but the record is not clear on the result of that motion. Two appeals were taken during the course of the litigation, but their outcomes are similarly unclear. The trial- and appeals-level dockets for this case indicated that it is closed, but the CMLP has not been able to determine exactly what happened.

Elsa Paton operated a website that reported on local affairs in Athol, Massachusetts and the surrounding community. The site functioned as an interactive public forum on issues relating to Athol town governance, including education funding and municipal use of tax dollars. It included information on education reform, a citizen letters section, cartoons, quotes, a link inviting public participation by email, and satirical articles.

On September 14, 1999, Mark MacDonald, a former Athol selectman, sued Paton and others for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.  According to filings in the case, MacDonald claimed that a local newspaper published an article referring to him as a "Gestapo agent," and Paton published a "dictionary entry" for the term "Nazi" that referred to him:

nazi - not see 1. A political affiliation whose platform espouses military dictatorship, racial cleansing, eugenics and intolerance. 2. In Athol, a term sometimes used to describe certain selectmen who wish to ignore most issues except for those which place them firmly in bed with chiefs of police. (see Old Macdonald had a gun, E - I - E - I - Oh shit). 

Paton filed a special motion to dismiss the complaint under the Massachusetts anti-SLAPP law, M.G.L. c. 231, § 59H.  The Superior Court judge rejected Paton's argument, saying that the state's anti-SLAPP law did not apply to her statement.  Paton appealed.

A Massachusetts appeals court held that Paton's publication of the statement was "petitioning activity" within the meaning of the Massachusetts anti-SLAPP statute because "the Web site served as a technological version of a meeting of citizens on the Town Green, a space where concerned individuals could come together to share information, express political opinions, and rally on town issues of concern to the community."

Paton's website has since been shutdown.

Internet auction website Bidbay.com and its president and CEO, George Tannous, sued Bruce Spry Jr. and two of its competitors for libel, intentional interference with prospective business advantage, unfair business practices, invasion of privacy, and disparagement in California state court.  According to a court opinion in the case, Spry allegedly made statements under various psuedonyms in forums and chat rooms stating that Bidbay.com sold child pornography and that Tannous failed to file or pay income taxes. Separately, the complaint alleged that Bidbay's competitor Auctioncow and its affiliate Mootropolis had conspired to drive Bidbay out of business through a defamation campaign.

Spry denied that he made the offending comments and moved to dismiss the case under California's anti-SLAPP statute. The court denied the motion, ruling that because Spry denied having made the defamatory comments, he could not have been engaged in an act in furtherance of his right of free speech.

Spry appealed the lower court's ruling to the California Court of Appeals, arguing that he was not required to admit making the statements in question in order to bring an anti-SLAPP motion. The court of appeals affirmed the lower court's decision, albeit on different grounds.  It concluded that Bidbay.com had submitted sufficient evidence supporting its claim to overcome the motion to strike. The appeals court then remanded the case back to the trial court.

The CMLP has not been able to determine what happened after the case returned to the trial court. 

The UK-based Society of Homeopaths sent a cease-and-desist letter to web host Netcetera demanding that it remove a post from Le Canard Noir's Quackometer blog entitled "The Gentle Art of Homeopathic Killing."

The Society alleged that the post, which criticized it for refusing to condemn the acts of homeopaths who claimed that they could provide pills that prevent and cure malaria, was defamatory. Netcetera complied with the demand and removed the post on October 11, 2007. Andy Lewis (a.k.a Le Canard Noir), wrote to the Society seeking clarification about which statements in particular were allegedly false and defamatory. The Society refused to provide these details, but apparently again wrote to Netcetera complaining that it had been contacted directly by Lewis.

According to DC's Improbable Science, within 24 hours of the takedown the post had been reposted on scores of blogs and news groups all around the world. The post is still reposted in many of these locations, suggesting that the Society has not attempted to stop these republications.

Netcetera received and complied with a similar letter from Dublin-based alternative medicine practitioner Dr. Joseph Chikelue Obi. See the CMLP database entry, Obi v. Netcetera.

Richard Frenkel authors the Patent Troll Tracker blog, where he comments on lawsuits that in his view abuse the patent system. Eric M. Albritton, a patent lawyer practicing in Texas, sued Frenkel and his employer, Cisco Systems, for defamation. Albritton alleges that Frenkel's post of October 18, 2007 falsely implied that Albritton and a colleague, John Ward, Jr., had conspired with a federal court official to illegally alter court documents.

Frenkel's October 18, 2007 post focused on ESN, LLC v. Cisco Systems, a patent lawsuit brought in the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Texas. He implied that ESN, LLC ("ESN") was a patent troll and claimed that when ESN filed its patent infringement suit against Cisco on October 15, 2007, the patent in question had not yet been issued. If this was the case, the post contended, ESN would have no standing to sue because it had not been injured at the time of the filing. Frenkel identified Eric Albritton and T. John Ward as ESN's local counsel responsible for filing the suit and allegedly altering documents to change the date of filing.

Frenkel operated Patent Troll Tracker anonymously up to the time of this blog post, but he subsequently "outed" himself after Ward sought to take discovery regarding his identity from Google. Albritton filed his original complaint in Texas state court against Frenkel and Cisco. Cisco then removed the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Albritton later amended his complaint to name two additional defendants, Mallun Yen and John Noh, both of whom are employees of Cisco. Both Yen and Noh have moved to dismiss the complaint against them for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Ward filed a nearly identical action against Frenkel and Cisco in Texas state court. He later dismissed this action and later refiled his complaint in federal court in Arkansas. By refiling in federal court in Arkansas, Ward may have intended to pre-empt Cisco from removing his case to the District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, as it had done with Albritton's case. See our database entry, Ward v. Cisco Systems, Inc., for details.

Update:

11/26/2008 - Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment in federal court.

12/24/2008 - Defendants filed reply in response to motion for summary judgment.

1/6/2009 - Plaintiff filed sur-reply to Defendants' reply.

2/27/09 - Court granted in part the defendants' motion for summary judgment and the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment.   

6/5/09 - Court denies plaintiff's motion to reconsider the granting of defendants' motion in limine. Court also denies defendants' motion to reconsider the denial of the defendants' motion to compel production of documents.

9/22/09 - The case settled after 4 days of trial.

 

North Carolina resident Jack Dailey filed a defamation suit against Donald Popma after Popma allegedly criticized him in Internet postings. According to court documents, Dailey claimed that Popma and co-defendant R. W. Beavers accused him of being a crook, a liar, and the "equivalent" of a child molester, among other things.

Popma, a Georgia resident, filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the North Carolina state court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. He stated that he had resided in North Carolina until July 2005, but had no contact with the state after that. Popma noted that he wrote the disputed postings after leaving the state. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss.

On appeal, the North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed. The court rejected Dailey's argument that the postings' effects in North Carolina were sufficient to confer jurisdiction under the Calder "effects" test.  See Calder v. Jones, 465 U.S. 783 (1984). The court reasoned that such a standard would eliminate the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction from all cases involving defamation on the Internet. Instead, the court held that a plaintiff must show that the defendant had an "intent to target" the forum state in order to be sufficient to confer personal jurisdiction.

The case against Beavers appears to be still pending.