Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)

2. "all of which were drawn from several publicly available lawsuits filed against Ivari"

Reply to octoberlib (Original post)

Tue Jun 14, 2016, 03:48 PM

Jun 2016

What is the purpose of that line?

Does the author think "If you quote something from a publicly available legal filing" then it can't be defamatory?

These people need better legal advice.

I can say something defamatory about someone in a filing in a civil suit, and that statement is protected against being deemed defamatory by a special immunity given to statements in legal proceedings.

However, if you take that statement, for which I had immunity when I made that statement to the court, and you publish it elsewhere, you are not protected from a defamation suit on the basis of your publication of that statement.

These people need better lawyers.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Now Peter Thiel's Lawyer Wants To Silence Reporting On Trump's Hair [View all] octoberlib Jun 2016 OP

I call him "the weavel." immoderate Jun 2016 #1

"all of which were drawn from several publicly available lawsuits filed against Ivari" jberryhill Jun 2016 #2

Does the law vary by state? I guess Gawker just doesn't care. Thiel is an octoberlib Jun 2016 #3

The litigation privilege is pretty uniform and deep rooted jberryhill Jun 2016 #5

If that's a $60,000 weave, he didn't get his money's worth. Vinca Jun 2016 #4