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

Home > Colocation America v. Garga-Richardson (2nd Lawsuit)

Colocation America v. Garga-Richardson (2nd Lawsuit) [1]

Submitted by DMLP Staff on Fri, 04/29/2011 - 16:16

Summary

Threat Type: 

Lawsuit

Date: 

10/29/2010

Status: 

Pending

Disposition: 

Dismissed (total)

Location: 

California

Verdict or Settlement Amount: 

N/A

Legal Claims: 

Tortious Interference
Trade Libel
In October 2010, Albert Ahdoot and Colocation America, a company providing computer server co-location to companies operating on the Internet, sued Archie Garga-Richardson, the founder and operator of ScamFraudAlert.com, in California. The plaintiffs claimed that Garga-Richardson committed... read full description
Parties

Party Receiving Legal Threat: 

Archie Garga-Richardson; Scamfraudalert.com; Does 1-25

Type of Party: 

Organization

Type of Party: 

Individual

Location of Party: 

  • Nevada

Location of Party: 

  • California

Legal Counsel: 

Paul S. Sigelman

Legal Counsel: 

Pro se
Description

In October 2010, Albert Ahdoot and Colocation America, a company providing computer server co-location to companies operating on the Internet, sued Archie Garga-Richardson, the founder and operator of ScamFraudAlert.com [2], in California. The plaintiffs claimed [3] that Garga-Richardson committed trade libel and both intentional and negligent interference with economic advantage against the company by posting statements on his website impugning the honesty of Ahdoot and Colocation America.

Garga-Richardson moved [4] on February 4, 2011, to strike the lawsuit under California's anti-SLAPP statute [5], Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16 [6].  Garga-Richardson argued that the plantiffs' claims were really an attempt to bring a defamation lawsuit in the guise of trade libel and tortious interference claims.  Garga-Richardson further argued that the plaintiffs' conduct was a matter of public interest and his comments upon that conduct were an exercise of his right of free speech.  As the plaintiffs' claims stem from that exercise, he argued, their lawsuit was a SLAPP and should be struck.

The plaintiffs opposed [7] the motion to strike, arguing that Garga-Richardson had filed his special motion to strike after the 60-day window for filing such a motion had closed.  The plaintiffs also argued that Garga-Richardson's motion was a de facto motion for summary judgment, and that he had not provided the statutory notice required for such a motion under California law.

On April 7, 2011, the court granted [8] Garga-Richardson's special motion to strike.  The court wrote that while Garga-Richardson's motion was a day late, the court would exercise its discretion to consider and rule on the motion.

The lawsuit was the second filed by Colocation America against Garga-Richardson.  Details on the first case, filed in April 2009, are available here [9].

Details

Web Site(s) Involved: 

Scamfraudalert.com [10]

Content Type: 

  • Text

Publication Medium: 

Website

Subject Area: 

  • SLAPP
  • Trade Libel
Court Information & Documents

Jurisdiction: 

  • California

Source of Law: 

  • California

Court Name: 

Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles

Court Type: 

State

Case Number: 

BC448509

Relevant Documents: 

PDF icon 2010-10-29-Colocation America's Complaint.pdf [11]
PDF icon 2011-02-04-Garga-Richardson's Special Motion to Strike.pdf [12]
PDF icon 2011-04-08-Colocation's Opposition to Special Motion to Strike.pdf [13]
PDF icon 2011-04-15-Order Granting Garga-Richardson's Special Motion to Strike.pdf [14]
PDF icon 2011-01-04-Garga-Richardson's Response.pdf [15]
CMLP Information (Private)

CMLP Notes: 

Archie faxed us all the documents we posted. - AAB 4/29/11

DMLP Logo


Source URL (modified on 08/20/2014 - 11:11pm): https://www.dmlp.org/threats/colocation-america-v-garga-richardson-2nd-lawsuit

Links
[1] https://www.dmlp.org/threats/colocation-america-v-garga-richardson-2nd-lawsuit
[2] http://www.scamfraudalert.com/
[3] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2010-10-29-Colocation%20America%27s%20Complaint.pdf
[4] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2011-02-04-Garga-Richardson%27s%20Special%20Motion%20to%20Strike.pdf
[5] https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/anti-slapp-law-california
[6] http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=ccp&group=00001-01000&file=425.10-425.18
[7] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2011-04-08-Colocation%27s%20Opposition%20to%20Special%20Motion%20to%20Strike.pdf
[8] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2011-04-15-Order%20Granting%20Garga-Richardson%27s%20Special%20Motion%20to%20Strike.pdf
[9] https://www.dmlp.org/threats/colocation-america-v-garga-richardson-lawsuit
[10] http://www.scamfraudalert.com
[11] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2010-10-29-Colocation%20America%27s%20Complaint.pdf
[12] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2011-02-04-Garga-Richardson%27s%20Special%20Motion%20to%20Strike.pdf
[13] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2011-04-08-Colocation%27s%20Opposition%20to%20Special%20Motion%20to%20Strike.pdf
[14] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2011-04-15-Order%20Granting%20Garga-Richardson%27s%20Special%20Motion%20to%20Strike.pdf
[15] https://www.dmlp.org/sites/dmlp.org/files/sites/citmedialaw.org/files/2011-01-04-Garga-Richardson%27s%20Response.pdf