Digital Media Law Project
Published on Digital Media Law Project (https://www.dmlp.org)

Home > Sedersten v. The Springfield News-Leader

Sedersten v. The Springfield News-Leader [1]

Submitted by DMLP Staff on Wed, 12/16/2009 - 14:34

Summary

Threat Type: 

Subpoena

Date: 

09/02/2009

Status: 

Concluded

Disposition: 

Subpoena Quashed

Location: 

Missouri

Verdict or Settlement Amount: 

N/A

Legal Claims: 

None
John Sedersten subpoenaed The Springfield News-Leader to obtain information about "bornandraisedhere," a pseudonymous commenter who posted a comment to an article on the News-Leader's website.  The subpoena issued in conjunction with Sedersten's civil lawsuit against the City of Springfield, Missouri,... read full description
Parties

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Gannett Missouri Publishing, Inc. d/b/a The Springfield News-Leader

Type of Party: 

Individual

Type of Party: 

Large Organization
Media Company

Location of Party: 

  • Missouri

Location of Party: 

  • Missouri

Legal Counsel: 

Craig R. Heidemann, Nathan A. Duncan - Douglas, Haun & Heidemann

Legal Counsel: 

Jason C. Smith, Bryan O. Wade - Husch Blackwell Sanders, LLP-Spfd
Description

John Sedersten subpoenaed The Springfield News-Leader to obtain information about "bornandraisedhere," a pseudonymous commenter who posted a comment to an article on the News-Leader's website [2].  The subpoena issued in conjunction with Sedersten's civil lawsuit against the City of Springfield, Missouri, Springfield's police chief, and a former Springfield police officer.  The News-Leader article discussed county prosecutors' decision to drop charges against the police officer, a decision that "bornandraisedhere" sharply criticized in his/her comment.

Gannett Missouri Publishing, the publisher of the News-Leader, objected to the subpoena, and Sedersten moved to compel the newspaper to turn over information.  In December 2009, the court denied Sedersten's motion to compel, ruling that bornandraisedhere's identity was not central to establishing Sedersten's negligence case against the City and its police chief.  The court also recognized that the commenter was entitled to First Amendment protection and had not waived that protection by agreeing to the News-Leader's privacy policy, which reserves to the newspaper "the right to use, and to disclose to third parties, all of the information collected from and about [users] while [using] the Site in any way and for any purpose."

Related Links: 

  • Technology & Marketing Law Blog: Online Commenter Did Not Waive Right to Anonymity by Agreeing to News Website's Privacy Policy [3]
Details

Web Site(s) Involved: 

News-Leader.com [2]

Content Type: 

  • Text

Publication Medium: 

Website

Subject Area: 

  • Third-Party Content
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Anonymity
Court Information & Documents

Jurisdiction: 

  • Missouri

Court Name: 

United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri

Court Type: 

Federal

Case Number: 

09-3031-CV-S-GAF

Relevant Documents: 

PDF icon 2009-09-30-Sedersten Motion to Compel.pdf [4]
PDF icon 2009-09-30-Suggestions in Support of Sedersten's Motion to Compel.pdf [5]
PDF icon 2009-10-23-Gannett Suggestions in Opposition to Motion to Compel.pdf [6]
PDF icon 2009-11-12-Sedersten Reply in Support of Motion to Compel.pdf [7]
PDF icon 2009-12-09-Order Denying Motion to Compel.pdf [8]

DMLP Logo


Source URL (modified on 08/20/2014 - 11:10pm): https://www.dmlp.org/threats/sedersten-v-springfield-news-leader

Links
[1] https://www.dmlp.org/threats/sedersten-v-springfield-news-leader
[2] http://www.news-leader.com/
[3] http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/12/online_commente.htm
[4] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-09-30-Sedersten%20Motion%20to%20Compel.pdf
[5] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-09-30-Suggestions%20in%20Support%20of%20Sedersten%27s%20Motion%20to%20Compel.pdf
[6] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-10-23-Gannett%20Suggestions%20in%20Opposition%20to%20Motion%20to%20Compel.pdf
[7] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-11-12-Sedersten%20Reply%20in%20Support%20of%20Motion%20to%20Compel.pdf
[8] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2009-12-09-Order%20Denying%20Motion%20to%20Compel.pdf