Looks like the judge told him what time it was
Looks like the judge told him what time it was
At least the winning side wasn't a bunch of $#@!ing lunatics too.Upon leaving the courtroom, Yerushalmi made the following statement:
“This lawsuit filed by Clock Boy’s father is yet another example of Islamist lawfare, which is a component of the Muslim Brotherhood’s civilization jihad.”
Yerushalmi further explained that the purpose of such lawsuits, formally labelled Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (“SLAPP”), is to intimidate into silence those who might comment publicly on the connection between jihad, terrorism, sharia, and Islam.
What does with prejudice mean?Judge Moore’s ruling dismissing the lawsuit against Hanson and CSP with prejudice.
Coverage on this is really sketchy. First, this isn't the civil rights lawsuit mentioned earliest in this thread. I heard on NPR that this was dismissed as against Glenn Beck and associates, and apparently some other "media" defendants, but was not dismissed against Irving mayor VanDuyne.
And it is pretty disgraceful in a defamation suit not to be able to swiftly point out something that is at least arguably false, and therefore defamatory. Should be sanctionable.
Ken White at Popehat has more details, along with some choice words about the bang-up job performed by plaintiff's counsel:
Mohamed's complaint vexes me. Not every statement one can utter is protected by the First Amendment; some statements are genuinely defamatory and outside legal protection. Defamation claims — particularly on matters of great public controversy — ought to be made in a clear and effective matter to limn the constitutional and factual issues at play. Mohamed's complaint falls short. It carelessly conflates statements of fact and statements of opinion, fails to articulate precisely what statements of fact are alleged to be false, and seems drafted without any informed thought about how to resist the inevitable anti-SLAPP motion.Fox and Ferguson's motion was comprehensive and supported by facts, evidence, and extensive legal citations. Mohamed's opposition was scattered and perfunctory. It did a very poor job of addressing the crucial distinction between protected opinion and potentially defamatory fact, devoting a few pages of poor argument unsupported by legal authority. So it is not surprising that the court granted Fox and Ferguson's motion in full and awarded more than $80,000 in fees to Fox and Ferguson.Blaze and Beck, through one set of lawyers, and CSP and Hanson, through another, also filed anti-SLAPP motions — motions too vast to host here. Their core argument throughout was that their challenged statements were opinion, commentary, and hyperbole, not potentially defamatory statements of fact — and they were substantially aided in those arguments by the very language of Mohamed's complaint. Mohamed attempted to fix this problem by filing an amended complaint. But the amended complaint mostly served to emphasize the rough-and-tumble cable-tv-hyperbole nature of the defendants' commentary, and to add references to mostly anonymous trolls who reacted with (arguably factual) accusations to the controversy. Mohamed's amended complaint also undermines itself by arguing how Beck's and CSP's statements should be understood as an accusation of involvement in terrorism, which merely serves to emphasize the statements' hyperbolic and opinion-based nature. Mohamed's single brief in opposition to both anti-SLAPP motions is, once again, woefully inadequate to the task. It utterly failed to engage the crucial distinction between fact and opinion — the heart of the case — and offered no useful authorities nor persuasive arguments on that point.
This week, after a length hearing, the court granted both motions. According to a triumphant press release by CSP's attorneys, the trial court pressed Mohammed's lawyers for specific false factual statements without result. I've seen no transcript, but that would be consistent with the poor quality of the papers. The court has now issued orders granting the motions and invited these defendants to submit affidavits documenting their attorney fees for recovery. I'm going to estimate that those fees from these defendants will total between $200,000 and $300,000. Mohamed's only consolation is that the court refused to make the findings necessary to pile separate monetary sanctions on top of the attorney fees.
So who do they stick with the bill Clockmed's dad or their lawyer?
It continues to amaze me how many really lousy lawyers there are out there. In my field, I don't cross paths with them very often, but every now and then, I am reminded that lawyers are like doctors -- the old joke about what do you call a guy who graduated last in his med school class? Doctor. Well, that applies to lawyers, too. The person who got the lowest passing grade on the Bar Exam has a law license. And in this case, apparently, her own leather-jacket wearing law firm.
Football .. OC .. Basketball .. Baseball .. Other Sports .. RC Didn't Offer .. Gamboool
Varsity .. Hole in the Wall .. PCL .. Einstein's .. Nasty's .. GM Steakhouse .. NSAA .. Classics
Bada Bing .. Bernard .. Nerdz .. Can you help me with this? .. Shagslist .. Cloak Room .. Bellmont