How well do you think your restaurant business would be doing if your phone book listing was tucked under the “Animal Carcass Removal” section in the local yellow pages?
Well, that’s just what this negligence lawsuit in Montana was about.
According to an AP report, a restaurant—Bar 3 Bar-B-Q—which has locations in Bozeman and Belgrade MT (and its own BBQ sauce, see left), was listed under “Animal Carcass Removal” in the yellow pages there. Now, forget about the simple fact that anyone looking under “Restaurants” would simply not see Bar 3 Bar-B-Q listed—that’s only half the issue. What about the people who actually notice the restaurant listed right along with other dead animal removal services?
That raises a whole bunch of questions not the least of which is…what exactly would a restaurant do with those dead animals? Re-purposed roadkill could, imaginably, help defray increasing food costs and give new meaning to “local beef”—though one can only think it would be a matter of time before something else that’s local—the health department—would have something to say about it.
Clearly, someone messed up and Hunter Lacey, who owns Bar 3 Bar-B-Q, was none too pleased. A late-night Jay Leno crack about it didn’t exactly help either—what was a local beef (pun intended) suddenly became a nationally known joke. It also didn’t help that the listing was not only originally printed in the 2009 phone book (when all this began) but that it was subsequently picked up in other phone directories in 2010 and 2011. Ouch.
So Lacey filed a negligence, defamation and slander lawsuit against the phone book company, Dex Media, Inc. And the two (Dex and Bar 3’s parent company, Big Sky Beverage) have finally settled.
According to AP, Dex had said that the listing was erroneous and that they removed the listed upon its discovery. Terms of the settlement have not been disclosed, but reports indicate that it would include a payment to the restaurant owner.
This one reminds me of that line—the one that goes, “If you haven’t got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me”. It’s usually attributed to Alice Roosevelt Longworth, though most folks probably think it’s from a Maxine greeting card. Regardless, talking trash about someone—whether it’s idle gossip or careless whispers (insert a nod to George Michael here)—can get you in serious trouble. Read on…
Slander and libel are two often-misunderstood (and misused) legal terms, but they could actually affect you at some point in your life, especially if you do a lot of writing online. Slander and libel are basically two sides of the same coin—they involve different forms of the same legal concept. So let’s back it up a bit and first, let’s look at defamation of character.
What is Defamation of Character?
Both slander and libel refer to defamation of character. Defamation of character is the passing along of false information that is stated as fact. To be considered defamation, the information must also do two things:
1. It has to bring harm to either a person or an organization (including a business), and
2. It has to be told (in writing or verbally) to at least one other person than the victim.
So, telling Sandra (not her real name!) that she is “a no good lying rotten thief” is not defamation of character. Telling other people that Sandra is a no good lying rotten thief could be defamation if that information harms Sandra.
Now, for the information to really be defamation of character, it must be untrue. So, if you publicly call Sandra a thief and you have evidence to back it up—for example, she’s already been found guilty in court of theft—you’re probably safe. But, if you publicly call her a thief based only on your hunch about her—with no evidence—prepare for a lawsuit.
So What are Slander and Libel?
Slander and libel are both forms of defamation of character. Slander is when Read the rest of this entry »
I recently came across an interesting article in The New York Times. The article was about a phenomenon known as SLAPP: Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Since the Internet has made SLAPP lawsuits more common, I thought I’d discuss them and their implications in this week’s Pleading Ignorance.
At their heart, SLAPP lawsuits are designed to intimidate and censor critics. The idea is that a company, say MegaCo, wants to stop critics from saying negative things publicly about the company. MegaCo would file lawsuits against those individuals who speak out against the company in an attempt to silence them.
Whether or not MegaCo would win the lawsuit is of no importance. Faced with mounting legal bills and the strain of a lawsuit, the defendant—often an individual with no legal team or financial resources to fall back on—abandons the criticism. Whether or not the criticism is valid is also of no importance. The important thing is that MegaCo has prevented someone from criticizing the company and has probably discouraged other critics from coming forward.
In many cases, MegaCo and the defendant won’t even see the inside of a courtroom. Usually, companies like MegaCo send a strongly-worded warning letter from their legal department, threatening legal action if the criticism isn’t taken back. Because the plaintiff is usually an individual who has no desire to face a lawsuit, the criticism is quickly abandoned.
Critics of SLAPP lawsuits say they violate free speech and amount to censorships. Some states, including California, have statutory protections against SLAPPs.
What is so dangerous about these lawsuits is they are not intended to win on their merits. They are only intended to stop people from using their right to freedom of speech by scaring them into silence. The difference between a SLAPP lawsuit and a legitimate defamation Read the rest of this entry »