D'Alonzo v. Truscello [1]

On February 3, 2004, the Philadelphia Daily News published an article reporting that two of State Senator Vincent Fumo's staff members had been subpoenaed as part of a federal corruption probe into the dismissals of thousands of parking tickets. The article indicated that staffer Tracy D'Alonzo was among the two aides subpoenaed. That same day, Nora Truscello re-published the Daily News article verbatim on her "gripe" site critical of Senator Fumo, www.dumpfumo.com.

The next day, the Daily News printed a retraction and reported that only one of Senator Fumo's aides had been subpoenaed (not D'Alonzo). Truscello also posted a retraction on her website.

D'Alonzo and her husband sued Truscello in Pennsylvania state court for defamation in April 2004. In February 2006, the court granted Truscello's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the case. The court relied on CDA 230, which provides immunity for publishing the statements of others online. This case is significant because the court applied CDA 230 even though Truscello was "active" in searching out, selecting, and posting the Daily News article, whereas most CDA 230 cases apply to website operators who "passively" allow users to post comment or other content on their sites.