1082 users online (215 members and 867 guests)  


Websleuths News


Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    24,159

    Post High court leans toward rejecting Web libel suit

    Posted on Wed, Sep. 06, 2006

    By David Kravets

    ASSOCIATED PRESS

    SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court is taking a dim view of libel lawsuits against Web site operators who post inflammatory information from other sources.

    The justices said during a 60-minute court hearing Tuesday testing the 1996 Communications Decency Act that Congress and other courts have already spoken on the issue.

    The justices were leaning toward tossing out a lawsuit against a San Diego woman who posted an allegedly libelous e-mail she received on her site's message board.

    The court rules within 90 days.

    The case is Barrett v. Rosenthal, S122953.

    more at link:http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/...s/15450107.htm
    This is the year to locate Mark Dribin http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...ht=Mark+Dribin NamUs MP#876 and Ilene Misheloff http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...lene+Misheloff NamUs MP#6410 and bring them home to their families!

    Parents watch your children. Free-range parenting leads to more child victims.

    Cruelty to humans begins with cruelty to animals.

    I believe in closure, not forgiveness. I'm also unapologetically judgemental.

    JeSuisJuif
    JeSuisCharlie


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,341
    Quote Originally Posted by LinasK
    Posted on Wed, Sep. 06, 2006

    By David Kravets

    ASSOCIATED PRESS

    SAN FRANCISCO - The California Supreme Court is taking a dim view of libel lawsuits against Web site operators who post inflammatory information from other sources.

    The justices said during a 60-minute court hearing Tuesday testing the 1996 Communications Decency Act that Congress and other courts have already spoken on the issue.

    The justices were leaning toward tossing out a lawsuit against a San Diego woman who posted an allegedly libelous e-mail she received on her site's message board.

    The court rules within 90 days.

    The case is Barrett v. Rosenthal, S122953.

    more at link:http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/...s/15450107.htm
    Thanks Linask. I had not previously seen that article.

    Since 1991 there has been an ebb and flow from the various State Courts as regards rulings on internet-based defamation suits. However, the clear overall trend since 1995 (re: Stratton as noted earlier in this thread) has greatly favored defamation attorneys.

    Still, California is a very liberal state overall, so should its highest Court cut against the grain in your referenced case, I would not be suprised. Plus, Barrett v. Rosenthal may have some unique case elements that California's Supreme Court might see as favoring the defendants.

    Regardless of how the gavel finally drops on Barrett, across the fifty states, I expect the overall trend of tightening the noose on disparaging or defaming web statements to continue. At the very least, people should be very prudent if they do make negative comments against a person or an entity. Even if only a meek summary judgment were to be rendered against a defendant, the cost of defending a defamation lawsuit can be very high.

    Further, if an individual's personal liability policy were to provide any coverage whatsoever, insurance companies have shown great disdain for being dragged into defamation lawsuits. No matter the outcome, future insurance policy fees would almost assuredly be dramatically hiked or, as is becoming more the norm, future coverage would simply be denied.

    Prudence offers many rewards; defamation offers none.
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    24,159

    Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge
    Thanks Linask. I had not previously seen that article.

    Since 1991 there has been an ebb and flow from the various State Courts as regards rulings on internet-based defamation suits. However, the clear overall trend since 1995 (re: Stratton as noted earlier in this thread) has greatly favored defamation attorneys.

    Still, California is a very liberal state overall, so should its highest Court cut against the grain in your referenced case, I would not be suprised. Plus, Barrett v. Rosenthal may have some unique case elements that California's Supreme Court might see as favoring the defendants.

    Regardless of how the gavel finally drops on Barrett, across the fifty states, I expect the overall trend of tightening the noose on disparaging or defaming web statements to continue. At the very least, people should be very prudent if they do make negative comments against a person or an entity. Even if only a meek summary judgment were to be rendered against a defendant, the cost of defending a defamation lawsuit can be very high.

    Further, if an individual's personal liability policy were to provide any coverage whatsoever, insurance companies have shown great disdain for being dragged into defamation lawsuits. No matter the outcome, future insurance policy fees would almost assuredly be dramatically hiked or, as is becoming more the norm, future coverage would simply be denied.

    Prudence offers many rewards; defamation offers none.
    Okay Wudge, how do they determine which state in which to file suit if it's the internet? Is is based on the poster's home state?
    This is the year to locate Mark Dribin http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...ht=Mark+Dribin NamUs MP#876 and Ilene Misheloff http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...lene+Misheloff NamUs MP#6410 and bring them home to their families!

    Parents watch your children. Free-range parenting leads to more child victims.

    Cruelty to humans begins with cruelty to animals.

    I believe in closure, not forgiveness. I'm also unapologetically judgemental.

    JeSuisJuif
    JeSuisCharlie




Similar Threads

  1. Rebecca Zahau Wrongful Death Suit Court Docs Links
    By bessie in forum Rebecca Zahau Nalepa
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-11-2016, 11:30 PM
  2. High Court Weighs in on Assisted Suicide
    By tybee204 in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-05-2005, 02:21 PM