Recent Changes At Charter Oak

Status
Not open for further replies.
I recall reading a sci-fi novel many years ago, Robert Heinlein IIRC, where in an alternate universe someone from ours noted while looking through a phone book that there were no lawyers listed in the yellow pages. When he inquired why he was told that they're was an insurrection and all of the lawyers were put to death. Not that I'm advocating violence, but it does have it's appeal. Mike
 
Personally, I don't want some juror who works at a 7-11 deciding my case. o_O
 
In the news this morning...

Fairfax home-owner NAME REMOVED wrote a poison-pill review of a contractor on Yelp, citing work he failed to do and jewelry missing from her home. She gave him one star, noting “do not put yourself through this nightmare of a contractor.”

NAME REMOVED responded by slapping her with a $750,000 lawsuit for defamation, according to the Washington Post. A local judge will rule today on his request for a preliminary injunction to prevent NAME REMOVED from writing similar reviews.

Lawyers label it a growing trend, citing a number of defamation lawsuits over online reviews at Yelp, Angie’s List and TripAdvisor. They say the freewheeling and acerbic world of Web speech is colliding with the ever-growing importance of online reputations for businesses, doctors, restaurants, even teachers, the Post reported.

NAME REMOVED, a retired captain in the armed services who stands by what she wrote on Yelp, said she never fathomed that her review could land her in court. It has left her reeling and potentially facing thousands of dollars in legal bills to defend herself.
 
IMHO, the allegation of "missing jewelry" is the big issue in that case. Unless the homeowner had solid proof, like a criminal conviction of the contractor for stealing the jewelry, the contractor certainly has grounds for a case against her.
 
coolidge said:
In the news this morning...
Click to expand...

The Dietz vs Perez case is interesting (this is an old case, "not today's news", although with some websites it is really hard to tell that the headline you are clicking on isn't from two years ago):
1. Work is done in 2011
2. Perez refuses to pay Diaz stating unfinished work and damage
3. Dietz sues Perez for unpaid work, but lawsuit is dismissed because he incorrectly filed paperwork in his own name rather in that of the LLC
2. Perez writes yelp review in 2012, including the statement of how the "summary judgement against Perez" proves she was right.
3. Dietz sues Perez for defamation in Oct 2012
4. Judge issues injunction against Perez in Dec 2012, demanding the review be modified (removing any discussion of Jewelry stolen and remove the claim that the dismissal of the lawsuit vindicated her)
5. ACLU gets involved to seek appellate review in Dec 2012, resulting in the Virginia Supreme Court overturning the injunction, stating that 1st amendment rights allows the posting, and that Dietz has adequate resource to pursue relief via legal means.
6. Jury trial finds both sides at fault, awards no damages in Jan 2014. 55 counts of defamation against Dietz, 6 against Perez.

Synopsis: only the lawyers won! I wonder what the legal bill was?

I suspect that 95% of the bad publicity affecting the contractor came as a result of the lawsuit, rather then the bad yelp review.

http://pubcit.typepad.com/clpblog/2...ds-both-sides-at-fault-awards-no-damages.html

This event shows the importance of keeping your yap shut to the press if you are involved in a lawsuit, and let the court try it rather then try it in the public media. The contractor essentially said this himself:

http://www.proremodeler.com/good-fight-how-i-defended-my-reputation

The defamation filing is here, and includes the original YELP review, which definitely went way beyond the provable "he did bad work", and includes statements about (nonexistent) investigations by the state AG, other (nonexistent) lawsuits against the contractor, etc:

http://www.citizen.org/documents/Dietz-complaint-no-exhibits.pdf

So I am not sure that this is a poster child case of "File a bad review and get sued". This is the poster child case of "don't pile on a bunch of un-provable nonsense in your bad review and DO pay for the contractor's work".

My sympathies lie with the contractor, as much as I hate lawsuits in general.
 
Last edited:
There is no free speech any more. Between Lawyers and the Politically Correct you have to watch every word you say or type.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top