VDARE's Libel Case Against N.Y. Times Thrown Out
UPDATE: Though this opinion was handed down just two weeks ago, it turns out to be a slightly revised version of an opinion from July 2022; my apologies for not noticing this at the outset.
UPDATE: Though this opinion was handed down just two weeks ago, it turns out to be a slightly revised version of an opinion from July 2022; my apologies for not noticing this at the outset.
The recommendation includes entry of a default judgment against Boteach in a defamation lawsuit brought against him by a Florida hotel.
A sample allegation: "[T]his was orchestrated because at this point, you fucking know that this was not an original idea. You know that it was stolen from a black creator, and you are still doing backflips to make excuses for that."
A Delaware trial court has denied Google's motion to dismiss, and concluded that, if the facts as alleged by Starbuck were true, he would have a legal basis for recovery.
A Magistrate Judge recommended today that the injunction be denied on First Amendment prior restraint grounds.
The court concluded that there wasn't enough evidence that the Post's statement (which the Post later retracted) was said with "actual malice," which is to say knowledge or recklessness about its falsehood.
can go forward, Georgia appellate court rules.
"'Yeah, I had no idea it was false. Yeah, that's right. Yeah,' then demand summary judgment because no one possesses contrary evidence from inside his head. That may be the ticket for comedy. It is not the ticket for summary judgment."
The court concluded that the particular broadcast in this case didn't name or otherwise sufficiently identify the plaintiff (Dr. Mahendra Amin), and thus wasn't "of and concerning" him for libel law purposes.
"Highlighting the absurdity of the sealing requests, one of the exhibits TMTG seeks to seal is the Post’s 2023 article, which was widely disseminated to the public when it was published and has been on file in the public docket in this case since July 2023."
They are, by my count, the 8th and 9th such claims filed in U.S. courts.
The judge had, before she was appointed a judge in 2024, represented an adverse party in a different lawsuit brought by Trump in 2022.
The plaintiffs had asked for (among other things) "$1.00 as an apology to every Chinese people live in mainland China, total $1.41 billion."
"Plaintiff's allegations in [an earlier] complaint let the cat out of the bag that he is a public figure. He cannot put the cat back into the bag in the hope of keeping his case alive."
Or at least try: A court considered it, but ultimately said no.
Celebrate your independence with a subscription to Reason magazine, your most trusted source of honest, insightful news and analysis.