Student Blogger Loses Defamation Case 289
An anonymous reader writes to tell us about Yaman Salahi, a UC Berkeley student and blogger, who lost a lawsuit brought against him by Lee Kaplan, a journalist for FrontPageMag.com. Kaplan had sued Salahi in California small claims court for tortious business interference and libel, in response to a blog Salahi had set up about him called "Lee Kaplan Watch." Salahi lost in small claims court and then lost an "appeal" — which is essentially a retrial by another small-claims judge. No written opinion was offered with either decision, though all other court filings are available. From Salahi's update on his blog: "...because [Kaplan] sued me in small claims court, I did not have the protections of the anti-SLAPP [Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Policy] statute... I will never know why I lost the initial hearing, or why I lost the appeal, because small claims judges are not obligated to release written opinions with their rulings.... I will never have the opportunity to take this to a real appellate court where my first amendment rights might be protected."
From his site (Score:3, Insightful)
Looks like things would have gone better if he hadn't made some legal mistakes.
Re:From his site (Score:4, Insightful)
It looks to me like instead a complicated legal maneuver designed to get around a clear hole in the fairness of the legal system.
I would not consider failing to countersue or failing to move the court to be a legal mistake, using the definition of mistake as failure to engage in proper actions.
Unbelievable! The guy's website is still there (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe on the merits? Mr. Salahi's website describes Mr. Kaplan as a "fraudulent journalist," which is another way of alleging he's incompetent to do his job, which the law calls "libel per se."
Anyway, the offending website is still up, so presumably Mr. Kaplan can sue Mr. Salahi yet again and win a second judgment for another $7,575.
no dog
Just a possibility (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe because you didn't have enough money to hire a real lawyer? Another victory for the $ystem.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:From his site (Score:5, Insightful)
And a system where the legal code is so complex that we have made it a crime for non-certified professionals to attempt to interpret it (in most every state, lobbied for by the same lawyers who want to get paid exhorbitant fees to defend you and to to prosecute you, thank you very much), is a system of INjustice.
Re:Thank you. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:From his site (Score:2, Insightful)
I want to especially thank my excellent lawyer, Adam Gutride, without whose generous moral and legal support I would not have been able to get through the past few months. He put himself at great risk by defending me and, despite this, he insisted on taking the case and invested many hours and much effort into it.
So presumably his decisions were based on advice from said lawyer - unless the lawyer wasn't involved until too late a stage, etc.
Re:Maybe he should hire a lawyer (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Unbelievable! The guy's website is still there (Score:3, Insightful)
If you equate Israel with Judaism... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Who's rights? (Score:1, Insightful)
That is not true. The government is enforcing a law that is punishing someone for their speech. While the courts have long ruled that some types of speech do not get 1st Amendment protection, the general idea still stands.
If the power of the government is being used, then the 1st Amendment applies. The only exception there is is contract law, which pretty much allows those in the contract to sign away all except for a few rights.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
In what sense is Parent "insightful" (Score:2, Insightful)
"I conclude this guy is wrong" followed by "what were they arguing about anyway?"
be deemed insightful?
Re:All negative opinions expressed forthrightly... (Score:3, Insightful)
Regardless of the merits or guilt of the case, the small claims system has an issue here that has clear abuse potential.
Re:All negative opinions expressed forthrightly... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I have a tag suggestion (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed. Some guy commits the very definition of libel and is sued for libel. He appeals and the appellate judge still thinks he committed libel. It happens all the time. From what I know, they're not going to let him appeal to a higher court, because the higher courts read the case and say: "This is a clear act of libel and it's only seven and a half grand." Why the hell should we care? You ARE responsible for what you say, even on the internet. Case closed.
Re:From the horse's mouth (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm going to be REALLY nice here and assume there is some substance under your ramblings, not just pure trollage.
What exactly did Salahi lie about in court?
Please enlighten us, since you were there. Just claiming someone lied, on a public website, would be libel, wouldnt it?
You and Kaplan claim Salahi harassed his employer, Salahi claims he tried to contact Kaplans ISP, to make them pull nazi allegations about Salahi from Kaplans webpage. Until I read the letter myself, I wont make up my mind. You obviously have, though.
Btw, I started reading the court documents, and I feel that any plaintiff who refers to the defendant as "the kid" in a letter to the courts ought to lose by default, but I guess thats just me.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
You lost, big guy (Score:4, Insightful)
Sounds to me like you're guilty. You might want to leave Lee Kaplan alone from now on.
Re:From the horse's mouth (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not your attorney, so instead I'm going to say: YOU ARE A GODDAMN FOOL FOR DUMPING FURTHER MATERIAL REGARDING A CASE ONTO THE GODDAMN INTERNET. Accusing someone in the public press of criminal conduct (read: AS IN THE ABOVE GODDAMN MESSAGE WHERE YOU GODDAMN PRINT A GODDAMN PERJURY CHARGE FOR CHRIST SAKE) is not only very actionable in court, but can put you on the receiving end of a libel case that can result in findings the SIZE OF A GODDAMN HOUSE. No, I'm not GODDAMN KIDDING. How would you like to own a GODDAMN QUARTER MILLION DOLLARS? But you're going to keep running your fingers over your GODDAMN KEYBOARD, aren't you!?!?!?
C//
Re:All negative opinions expressed forthrightly... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:From the horse's mouth (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Moderated Informative - you've got to be kiddin (Score:5, Insightful)
Get a lawyer. Get a lawyer. Get a lawyer. (Score:3, Insightful)
I just can't repeat it often enough. Sure, depending on the law a lawyer can't represent you in small claims court, but he can certainly prepare you for it behind the scenes, greatly increasing your chances. Besides, just preparing you costs a lot less.
Get a lawyer.
The confusion over what court is what and how appeals go simply endorses the point.
Get a lawyer.
Before it's too late (like after you lose).
Or maybe it's not too late. Think "countersuit," especially if you're right about him falsifying evidence. You might have a nice little defamation case on your hands.
Get a lawyer.
Re:You lost, big guy (Score:3, Insightful)