154
Comments (3)
sorted by:
7
Theman2c 7 points ago +7 / -0

Pay up! A settlement is coming I guarantee it.

6
Staatssicherheit 6 points ago +6 / -0

The Second Circuit disagreed and stated “Thin as the findings are to begin with, the district court did not take into account the requirement that a limited purpose public figure maintain ‘regular and continuing access to the media.'”

It also rejected the use of the California anti-Slapp statute to shift attorney fees to the winner under California’s anti-SLAPP statute. The Second Circuit ruled that the state anti-SLAPP law was inapplicable in federal court which follows countervailing standards on the necessary showing for cases. Under federal rules, a plaintiffs must show only a plausibility — not the probability — of prevailing. It also ruled that Reid does not enjoy immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

Each of these holding would be a considerable loss but their combination in one case is a devastating loss for media defendants.

Turley is doing some really good reporting.

5
Eternal_Vigilance 5 points ago +5 / -0

Look for this type of case to wind up in the Suprme Court. The Circuit Courts are split on Anti-Slapp statute being applied in Federal court.