CRIMINAL CASE: U.S. v. Drew, Crim. No. 08-00582 (C.D. Cal. indictment filed May 15, 2008).
Status: conviction on three misdemeanor charges, acquittal on three of the felony charges, hung jury on one felony charge (C.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2008); felony charge dismissed (Dec. 31, 2008); convictions rev'd on post-trial motions (preliminary ruling July 2, 2009).
Lori Drew created a fake MySpace page as part of scheme to find out how a particular 13-year-old girl felt about the woman’s daughter. She posed as a boy who flirted online with Megan Meier for a month. Then another girl who had a password to the account began sending nasty e-mails to Megan, and sent an e-mail breaking off the apparent relationship. Megan then committed suicide.
In early December 2007, St. Charles County prosecuting attorney Jack Banas announced that there was insufficient evidence to file harassment, stalking or child endangerment charges against Drew. Federal prosecutors in Missouri also said there was no basis for prosecution.
But in May 2008 a federal grand jury in California issued an indictment for conspiracy and computer fraud. The indictment claims jurisdiction with the California court based on the location of MySpace’s headquarters. On June 12. 2008, Drew pleaded not guilty. In August, the Electronic Frontier Foundation submitted a brief seeking dismissal of the case, arguing that the prosecution is misapplying a federal computer fraud statute.
In late November a jury convicted Drew of three misdemeanor charges of accessing MySpace’s computers without authorization in order to obtain information about the 13-year-old, acquitted her of three felony charges of unauthorized access to MySpace's servers in order to cause emotional distress, and reached a deadlock on one felony charge of conspiracy (which was dismissed at request of the prosecutor).
In July 2009, the judge threw out the convictions in a preliminary ruling on post-trial motions, with a written decision forthcoming.
The prosecutor filed a notice of appeal in late September 2009, but requires approval from U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan before the appeal proceeds.
Links and Court Documents:
No charges to be filed over Meier suicide Prosecutor says MySpace hoax doesn't cross criminal threshold (St. Charles, Mo. Journal, Dec. 3, 2007)
A Hoax Turned Fatal Draws Anger but No Charges (New York Times, Nov. 28, 2007)
L.A. grand jury issues subpoenas in Web suicide case (Los Angeles Times, Jan. 9, 2008)
Woman pleads innocent in Myspace hoax suicide case (Reuters, June 16, 2008)
EFF urges judge to dismiss MySpace case (CNet News, Aug. 4, 2008)
Govt: Cyberbullying is a New Phenomenon, as is Social Networking (Wall Street Journal Law Blog, Aug. 13, 2008)
Judge tentatively refuses to dismiss Internet case (Associated Press, Sept. 4, 2008)
Judge Throws Out Conviction in Cyberbullying Case (New York Times, July 2, 2009)
Prosecutor Dismisses Felony Charge In MySpace Case (Online Media Daily, Jan. 2, 2009)
Drew Case May Go To Higher Court (Online Media Daily, Sept. 28, 2009)
Prosecutors Drop Plans to Appeal Lori Drew Case (Wired "Threat Level" blog, Nov. 20, 2009).
>> EFF amicus brief
Showing posts with label Post-Trial Motions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Post-Trial Motions. Show all posts
Saadi v. Maroun, No. 07-CV-01976 (M.D. Fla. filed Oct. 31, 2007).
Status: $90,000 verdict for plaintiff.
Lawyer Edward T. Saadi filed a complaint against his cousin Pierre Maroun, Hala Fakhre Maroun, and several anonymous defendants based on blog and forum postings that alleged that Saadi consorted with terrorists, diverted funds from a non-profit to support terrorism, hadn't gone to law school and had a teenage girlfriend. Later Saadi added Maroun’s International, LLC as a defendant.
A motion to dismiss the claims of defamation was denied on court findings that the statements were held out as factual, and not as opinions. Hala Maroun was subsequently dropped from the lawsuit. A defense motion for summary judgment was denied, and the case proceeded to trial.
After a three-day trial, the court dismissed the claims against Maroun's International. The jury then found for Saadi and awarded $90,000: $30,000 in compensatory damages, and $60,000 in punitive damages.
The defendant has filed a post-trial motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or a new trial.
Links and Court Documents:
Case Information (Citizen Media Law Project)
Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (filed Mar. 30, 2008)
Judgment (filed Oct. 2, 2009)
Status: $90,000 verdict for plaintiff.
Lawyer Edward T. Saadi filed a complaint against his cousin Pierre Maroun, Hala Fakhre Maroun, and several anonymous defendants based on blog and forum postings that alleged that Saadi consorted with terrorists, diverted funds from a non-profit to support terrorism, hadn't gone to law school and had a teenage girlfriend. Later Saadi added Maroun’s International, LLC as a defendant.
A motion to dismiss the claims of defamation was denied on court findings that the statements were held out as factual, and not as opinions. Hala Maroun was subsequently dropped from the lawsuit. A defense motion for summary judgment was denied, and the case proceeded to trial.
After a three-day trial, the court dismissed the claims against Maroun's International. The jury then found for Saadi and awarded $90,000: $30,000 in compensatory damages, and $60,000 in punitive damages.
The defendant has filed a post-trial motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or a new trial.
Links and Court Documents:
Case Information (Citizen Media Law Project)
Opposition to Motion to Dismiss (filed Mar. 30, 2008)
Judgment (filed Oct. 2, 2009)
Cretella v. Kuzminski, Civil No. 08-109 (E.D. Va. jury verdict for plaintiffs Feb. 4, 2009).
Status: $236,000 jury award ($120,000 compensatory, $116,000 punitive) remittited to $53,000 ($30,000 compensatory, $23,000 punitive), 2009 WL 2423368 (E.D. Va. July 31, 2009).
In February 2007, plaintiff Victor Cretella, who was then outside counsel for the on-demand publishing firm PublishAmerica, sent a cease-and-desist letter to Christine Norris, who had referred to the company as "a scam" in comments she posted to forum section of the Absolute Write website (http://www.absolutewrite.com). Norris reacted to the letter by posting additional comments to the forum, restating her complaints against PublishAmerica and inviting the company to "Bring. It. On." Many other commenters in the Absolute Write forum posted comments expressing support for Norris.
One of these was defendant David Kuzminski, who also posted comments about the controversy on his own website, Preditors and Editors (http://www.anotherealm.com/prededitors/), a resource guide for writers. The commentary by Kuzminski and others on the Absolute Write site and other sites, and by Kuzminski on his own site, continued when Cretella accepted the position as general counsel of PublishAmerica.
Cretella sued Kuzminski over a number of his comments. After pre-trial motions, defamation claims remained against nine comments by Kuzminski: seven on the Absolute Write site, one on his own site, and one on another site.
After a two-day trial, the jury awarded a total of $236,000 in damages ($120,000 compensatory, $116,000 punitive). On a post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law or remittitur, the court offered a remittitur to $53,000 ($30,000 compensatory, $23,000 punitive), or a new trial. 2009 WL 2423368 (E.D. Va. July 31, 2009).
The plaintiff accepted the remittitur on Aug. 14.
Links and Court Documents:
http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/cretella-v-kuzminski
http://valawyersweekly.com/blog/2009/08/10/defamed-lawyer%E2%80%99s-win-is-reduced/
Status: $236,000 jury award ($120,000 compensatory, $116,000 punitive) remittited to $53,000 ($30,000 compensatory, $23,000 punitive), 2009 WL 2423368 (E.D. Va. July 31, 2009).
In February 2007, plaintiff Victor Cretella, who was then outside counsel for the on-demand publishing firm PublishAmerica, sent a cease-and-desist letter to Christine Norris, who had referred to the company as "a scam" in comments she posted to forum section of the Absolute Write website (http://www.absolutewrite.com). Norris reacted to the letter by posting additional comments to the forum, restating her complaints against PublishAmerica and inviting the company to "Bring. It. On." Many other commenters in the Absolute Write forum posted comments expressing support for Norris.
One of these was defendant David Kuzminski, who also posted comments about the controversy on his own website, Preditors and Editors (http://www.anotherealm.com/prededitors/), a resource guide for writers. The commentary by Kuzminski and others on the Absolute Write site and other sites, and by Kuzminski on his own site, continued when Cretella accepted the position as general counsel of PublishAmerica.
Cretella sued Kuzminski over a number of his comments. After pre-trial motions, defamation claims remained against nine comments by Kuzminski: seven on the Absolute Write site, one on his own site, and one on another site.
After a two-day trial, the jury awarded a total of $236,000 in damages ($120,000 compensatory, $116,000 punitive). On a post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law or remittitur, the court offered a remittitur to $53,000 ($30,000 compensatory, $23,000 punitive), or a new trial. 2009 WL 2423368 (E.D. Va. July 31, 2009).
The plaintiff accepted the remittitur on Aug. 14.
Links and Court Documents:
http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/cretella-v-kuzminski
http://valawyersweekly.com/blog/2009/08/10/defamed-lawyer%E2%80%99s-win-is-reduced/
Staten v. Steel, No. 16-05-15033 (Or. Cir. Ct. Lane County jury verdict _____).
Status: $110,000 jury verdict affirmed (No. A133080, 222 Or. App. 17, 191 P.3d 778 (Or. App. Aug. 20, 2008), rev. denied, 345 Or. 618, 201 P.3d 909 (Or. Jan 13, 2009).
As part of a crusade against Club 71, a bar with nude dancing in Sunny Valley, Ore., defendants took pictures of club patrons and posted them and license plate numbers on their web site, www.seewhosthere.com.
Among those photographed and pictured on the site was plaintiff Greg Staten, who visted the club in March 2005 with his wife and some friends, and got into a scuffle with defendant Robert Falbo, who took pictures of Staten driving away from the club. During the scuffle, Staten destroyed Falbo’s camera.
Falbo took pictures with another camera, and posted them with commentary on the site. Staten sued for false light, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and civil conspiracy; he later added similar claims based on commentary posted on the site in response to his lawsuit. Falbo claimed that the statements were mere hyperbole.
The trial court denied motions to dismiss the suit under Oregon’s anti-SLAPP law and for summary judgment, and a jury trial was held which resulted in a $110,000 verdict for plaintiff.
After trial, the court denied plaintiff’s motions for reimnursement for attorney fees and for sanctions against defendants’ attoirneys. On appeal, the appellate court affirmed the jury verdict, but vacated the trial’s court’s rulings on attorneys fees and sanctions, sending those rulings back to the trial court for reconsideration.
Links and Court Documents:
Appellate decision: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A133080.htm
Status: $110,000 jury verdict affirmed (No. A133080, 222 Or. App. 17, 191 P.3d 778 (Or. App. Aug. 20, 2008), rev. denied, 345 Or. 618, 201 P.3d 909 (Or. Jan 13, 2009).
As part of a crusade against Club 71, a bar with nude dancing in Sunny Valley, Ore., defendants took pictures of club patrons and posted them and license plate numbers on their web site, www.seewhosthere.com.
Among those photographed and pictured on the site was plaintiff Greg Staten, who visted the club in March 2005 with his wife and some friends, and got into a scuffle with defendant Robert Falbo, who took pictures of Staten driving away from the club. During the scuffle, Staten destroyed Falbo’s camera.
Falbo took pictures with another camera, and posted them with commentary on the site. Staten sued for false light, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and civil conspiracy; he later added similar claims based on commentary posted on the site in response to his lawsuit. Falbo claimed that the statements were mere hyperbole.
The trial court denied motions to dismiss the suit under Oregon’s anti-SLAPP law and for summary judgment, and a jury trial was held which resulted in a $110,000 verdict for plaintiff.
After trial, the court denied plaintiff’s motions for reimnursement for attorney fees and for sanctions against defendants’ attoirneys. On appeal, the appellate court affirmed the jury verdict, but vacated the trial’s court’s rulings on attorneys fees and sanctions, sending those rulings back to the trial court for reconsideration.
Links and Court Documents:
Appellate decision: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A133080.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)