Florida judge dismisses fraud lawsuit against DNC

[Jim Lane]

92. Your statement about my posts is an outright falsehood.

You claim that I'm "trying to discuss" the DC Code provision. I am not. Although I've made numerous posts about Judge Zloch's decision, there is not one single post in which I contended that the DC Code provision covers political donations. Judge Zloch also did not address that issue.

You'll note that his dismissal of the case was "without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction." (Decision, page 28) The "without prejudice" part means that these plaintiffs could file a new case in a DC court of general jurisdiction in which they could again allege a cause of action under the DC Code provision. Such a case might produce a ruling about whether political donors are within that provision.

Then again, it might not, because the plaintiffs would presumably still be faced with the "reliance" argument that was fatal to their federal case. IOW, one possible outcome of such a new case would be that the DC court, like Judge Zloch, wouldn't even reach the issue of the scope of the DC Code provision. That court might instead hold that there's no remedy for deceptive practices unless the plaintiff can show that he or she acted in reliance on the deception, and these plaintiffs haven't alleged reliance, therefore their complaint fails to state a cause of action even if we assume that the DC Code provision covers political donations.

If, on the other hand, the issue of the scope of the provision is decided, I have expressed no opinion and continue to express no opinion about which way the decision would go.