Recent Suits Show Why Anti-Slapp Statute Is Important

 

Posted on August 22, 2012 by Leslie Machado

Two relatively recent cases caught my eye and reinforced why it is so important that DC passed anti-SLAPP legislation last year.

In King v. Hludzenski, filed in a New York state court north of Syracuse, the plaintiffs are former town officials and
other public figures who allege that two bloggers, allegedly highly critical of the town’s plans to install wind farms, defamed them.  And in Thomas v. Barrett, filed in a Michigan federal court, two animal rescue organizations and its owners allege that several North Carolina defendants defamed them by making comments on Facebook.
  

Now I don’t know if the plaintiffs in either case will be able to prevail on their libel claims, which typically requires a showing that the defendant made a false and defamatory statement concerning the plaintiff; (2) that the defendant published the statement without privilege to a third party; (3) that the defendant’s fault in publishing the statement amounted to at least negligence; and (4) either that the statement was actionable as a matter of law irrespective of special harm or that its publication caused the plaintiff special harm.

But it is clear that the lawsuits will cause the defendants to incur substantial fees to defend themselves against what look like typical SLAPP suits (indeed, the King plaintiffs not only sued the bloggers, but promise to seek the identify of various anonymous commenters and name them as defendants, which will undoubtedly have a chilling effect on speech).Continue reading via the link below 

link to original

D.C. Anti-SLAPP Law

Free Speech Protections Against Frivolous Lawsuits