ok, I have just started reading this, so that is my disclaimer.
could this be an UL in the making?
I just got an email about the exact same thing, except it was a lady and a matress store.
just curious…
Expect your summons and complaint any day now…
If it’s an UL, it seems to have fooled the local Atlanta press (which wrote an article about it) and also, someone posted a link to the Cobb County trial listings (whatever you call them) showing the actual lawsuit, the defendants and plaintiffs, etc. It seems real enough to me.
Restatement (second) of torts §568:
- Libel consists of the publication of defamatory matter by written or printed words, or by its embodiment in physical form, or by another form of communication which has the potentially harmful qualities characteristic of written or printed words.
- Slander consists of the publication of defamatory matter by spoken words, transitory gestures, or by any form of communication other than those stated in subsection 1.
In other words, if anything, this is libel, not slander. But what is a defamatory matter?
Black’s Law Dictionary defines Defamation as:
The act of harming the reputation of another by making a statement to a third person. If the alleged defamation involves a matter of public concern, the plantiff is constitutionally required to prove both the statement’s falsity and the defendant’s fault.
To sum up, Jim Ellis must first prove defamation before proving libel. They must show that the OP knowingly posted false infomation. If they prove that, the rest is easy. If it truly is defamatory, it most clearly is libel.
The OPer mentioned in the thread that when complaining to the dealership about the thread, people shouldn’t mention that the dealership had “lost their business” because it could be construed as damages, making it harder to win the case.
Could this actually be done or was it an extra precaution taken by the OPer?
Here’s a link to the Cobb County Superior Court calendar.
Pure curiosity, Ender: what edition have you got? My abridged 6th ed. has “An intentional false communication, either published or publicly spoken, that injures another’s reputation or good name. . . . To recover against a public . . . figure, plaintiff must prove that the defamatory statement was publised with malice. Malice as used in this context means that it was published either knowing that it was false or with a reckless disregard as to whether it was true or false. . . .”
I’m surprised that your copy does not include the requirement of falsehood (unless, of course, it’s in a part that you didn’t happen to quote here). IANAL, but I’ve always understood that falsity was an important element of defamation, and truth in almost all cases is an absolute defense.
I welcome any correction on this point; I’m still trying to get a good handle on this topic!
Without having read the linked thread, this lawsuit strikes me as sort of a “SLAPP” suit – Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. The idea is not to ultimately win on the merits, which would be tough, but to use their superior resources to discourage the public conduct of the defendant.
- Rick
On page 6 of the linked thread, the guy being sued says the dealership got the restraing order keeping him away from the dealership. However, they did not get the order to keep him from talking about it.
There are several others posting there saying they had problems with these folks (at the dealership) too. The thread is like 14 pages long now.
Thanks for the link, Grace. There’s another one, here: http://www.cobbgasupctclk.com/scripts/courtscv.dll/CivilDetail?caseno=01108942 that has a place on it for the disposition to be posted, whenever that happens. The hearing was yesterday morning. I’m dying to know what happened!
However, if you do take the time to read through that thread, you’ll see that the defendant is considering filing a counter suit under the anti-SLAPP rules, as they apply in the state of Georgia.
taken from http://www.sirius.com/~casp/statega.html
Ok, stupid legal question here…
Can a defendant who’s being sued in a county court use a ruling by a U.S. District court as precedence in their defense? See this article, which in part says: (bolding mine)
In that case, the court found that,
Sounds a lot like what this guy is facing here. So could he cite this ruling in any way in his defense?
Wow, that thread is inspiring stuff. Makes me proud to be a member of a message board community.
Communication is bad service’s worst nightmare. The old saying used to be that each dissatisfied customer tells, on average, ten people about their dissatisfaction. The internet multiplies that immeasurably.
Power to the people.
pan
This may be TOTALLY irrevelent to the situation at hand.
I am a former VW Jetta owner, it was used so that’s on VW’s side but it was the biggest peice of crap but when worked well would fly across the land with excellent handling and excellent speed.
However, it is not fun to have a cream business suit on and in the middle of a god damned (pardon me god) intersection and having to reestablish the fucking ground wires for a 3 year old car. Not to mention that it would happen less than 100 feet from my home or when I was on a turn. God I loved that car for the speed and handling but it was the biggest crap of a car to maintain and damned expensive. For that I will never buy a VW again.
Thankfully I have my Honda Accord with a service company that treats me well. My Honda is easy to work on, relatively cheap to repair and all of the Hondas I have owned seem to like to prove themselves when abused from lack of maintanence.
As far as dealerships are concerned:
Sheesh, I had purchased my Chevy K1500 regular cab from a Colorado Springs dealership ( Daniels Chevrolet ) and when I moved to Grand Junction ( five hour drive ) the Ed Bozarth Chevy dealership treated me like gold. Hell with as well as they treated me I ended up buying an extended cab ( custom built baby with a 454 ) K2500 then later a Suburban.
If a dealership treats me well, I am willing buy from them again and again (and I have had my problems with dealers in the past) but if they treat me like shit I will let the world know.
I feel for the guy, that really sucks. To tell his experience in a negative light should NEVER be a reason that a business claims foul play and takes the guy to court. That’s really fucked up. If you treat your customers like shit, they have every right to tell every man, woman and child that is willing to listen.
If they lose business because of it, then they need to get off their asses and show the OP of that thread and every damn client that also had similar experiences that they will bend backwards for them. Either that or they need to improve customer service dramatically. As a former sales rep, I can’t tell you how horrible I felt when my clients weren’t getting the service they deserved. The service men that came over to help me with window and door problems always got a free home cooked meal (more than they normally got,) a beer or a dinner out on me. I sucked up to my service guys because I wanted my clients to recommend me to another. I wanted my customers to be happy. Most of all, my last name was on that window or door and I would be damned if I wouldn’t do what I could to help my customer out. Shit, I even had other companies work with problems when my service guys weren’t available.
Poor service is no excuse, and when a customer complains, it is of the company’s duty to ensure that you do what you can to fix it even if free, even if you are in a pissy mood. It’s about the customer, not the defamation or the slander or the whatever of your name or business. I have been there, done that and in good faith to my clients have bent over backwards so that dealership has no excuse and I hope the OP of that thread gets money out of that dealership for his troubles, assuming it’s all true.
Being in a capitalistic society does not mean to screw the customer. But then again the customer is letting the future buyer beware…how odd is that?
I’ve read it, and that’s exactly what it is.
And had it happened here-- at this message board-- it probably would have worked.
I remember the threads here discussing the ramifications of a lawsuit against the SDMB. It was clear-- this place would be shut down in a New York minute. The Reader simply wouldn’t waste its time with such a thing, no matter how trivial, so we needed, and still need, to watch what we say.
The position of the SDMB administration is understandable. But that position was probably what the dealership was hoping to find over there-- “Uh, oh, lawsuit! Better shut this thread down and delete it. We can’t have this. We need to distance ourselves, fast.”.
Again, understandable, but too bad, in a way.
Because over there, at that message board, it backfired—the threads still open, and it seems to have only emboldened all those involved.
I tell ya, I don’t know who I’m more proud of-- that guy for fighting the dealership and not backing down, or that message board, for sticking up for it’s member and not backing down either. In fact, it seems that both parties are even more resolute than before.
Again, damn cool if you ask me, because I don’t see that happening at many other places, and with many other people.
*And to those intimidated by that threads length-- simply read the first four or five pages. It’s definitely worth it, and it gets to the meat of the issue early on.
That’s always been my understanding, too. We vet a lot of things through our lawyers (publishing houses have to) and I’ve picked up the impression that, regardless of the content, the truth cannot be actionable.
OK, I’m reading the thread, and it’s interesting and all, but one question: what does TTT mean? I can’t figure it out from context. The only thing that vaguely fits is Truth To Tell, but that doesn’t work in all instances of it’s useage.
Fenris
I saw that too. I haven’t figured out. At first I thought it was some way to get people to stay on-topic, but I don’t think so now.
“To the top?” According to this site, that’s what TTT means. It may be a synonym for “bump”, as in “to the top of the thread listing.” Just a WAG, of course.
Top The Topic/Thread. Same as bump.