Citizendia

A Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation ("SLAPP") is litigation intended to intimidate and silence critics or opponents by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense so that they abandon their criticism or opposition. In law a lawsuit is a civil action brought before a Court in which the party commencing the action the Plaintiff, seeks a legal or equitable remedy The acronym was coined in the 1980s by University of Denver professors Penelope Canan and George W. Acronyms, initialisms, and alphabetisms are Abbreviations that are formed using the initial components in a phrase or name The 1980s was the decade spanning from January 1 1980 to December 31 1989. Pring. It was originally defined as a lawsuit involving communications made to influence a governmental action or outcome, which resulted in a civil complaint or counterclaim filed against nongovernment individuals or organizations on a substantive issue of some public interest or social significance. [1] It has been defined more broadly by some to include suits arising from speech in connection with a public issue. [2]

Contents

SLAPPs by location

Australia

Canada

One of the first cases in Canada to deal with a SLAPP was Fraser v. Saanich (see [1999] B. C. J. No. 3100 (B. C. S. C. )) (QL), where the British Columbia Supreme Court struck out the claim of a hospital director against the District of Saanich, holding that it was a meritless action designed to silence or intimidate the residents who were opposed to the plaintiff’s plan to redevelop the hospital facilities.

Following the decision in Fraser v. Saanich, the Protection of Public Participation Act came into effect in British Columbia in April, 2001. It was repealed in August, 2001.

The first case to discuss and apply the PPPA was Home Equity Development v. Crow, (see [2002] B. C. J. No. 1805 (B. C. S. C. )) (QL). The defendants application to dismiss the action against them was dismissed. The defendants failed to meet the burden of proof required by the PPPA, that the plaintiffs had no reasonable prospect of success. Many felt that the plaintiffs did not bring their action for an improper purpose, and the suit did not inhibit the defendants in their public criticism of the particular project.

In Ontario, the decision in Daishowa v. Friends of the Lubicon (see [1996] O. J. No. 3855 Ont. Ct. Gen. Div. )) (QL) was also instructive on SLAPP’s. A motion brought by the corporate plaintiff Daishowa to impose conditions on the defendant Friends of the Lubicon Indian Band that they would not represent Daishowa’s action as a SLAPP was dismissed.

Some political libel and forum shopping incidents, both common in Canada, have been called SLAPP suits, because such suits load defendants with costs of responding in unfamiliar jurisdictions or at times (typically elections) when they're extremely busy and short of funds. The 16th and 17th century criminal statutes protecting nobility from criticism in England eventually evolved into various categories of political libel (see Slander and libel Forum shopping is the informal name given to the practice adopted by some Litigants to get their Legal case heard in the Court thought most likely Both types of suits are almost unique to Canada, so there is little concern nor examination of whether political subject matter or remote forums are a clear indicator of SLAPP.

Europe

In February 2005 the European Court of Human Rights found that Helen Steel and David Morris did not receive a fair trial while defending a libel action brought by McDonald's in the United Kingdom. The European Court of Human Rights ( ECtHR) (Cour européenne des droits de l’homme in Strasbourg was established under the European Convention on Human Rights The McDonald's Restaurants v Morris & Steel, colloquially the McLibel case, was a long-running English court action for Libel David Morris may refer to David Morris (general, commander of United States Army Civil Affairs & Psychological Operations Command (Airborne The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, commonly known as the United Kingdom, the UK or Britain,is a Sovereign state located In what became known as the McLibel case, the two had been found guilty in 1994 of libelling the company in a leaflet. The McDonald's Restaurants v Morris & Steel, colloquially the McLibel case, was a long-running English court action for Libel The court ruled that, because legal aid is not available to libel defendants, their right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated. Most liberal democracies consider that it is necessary to provide some level of legal aid to persons otherwise unable to afford legal representation Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak freely without Censorship or Limitation. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (also called the "European Convention on Human Rights" and "ECHR" was adopted under the They were awarded £24,000 damages, plus costs.

New Zealand

Other examples include:

South Africa

Anglo Platinum, the world's largest platinum miner and a subsidiary of Anglo American PLC, the world's second largest mining corporation, filed SLAPPs against a South African public interest lawyer Richard Spoor, who represented indigenous communities affected by platinum mining on tribal land. Anglo Platinum ltd is the world's largest primary producer of Platinum, accounting for about 38% of the world's annual production The actions include an application in the High Court for a so-called gagging order, ostensibly to prevent him further injuring the good name and reputation of the corporation, the lodging of complaints with the Law Society of unprofessional behaviour and the lodging of a civil action for damages for some $500,000. 00. AngloPlatinum also obtained an ex parte (without notice) order interdicting two tribal chiefs from interfering with their mining operations and had them arrested on charges of intimidation and trespass. Subsequently, followers of the two tribal chiefs were shot, beaten and arrested for protesting the mine's presence on tribal land.

United States

California

The U.S. state of California enacted Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16 in 1992, a statute intended to prevent the misuse of litigation in SLAPP suits. A US state is any one of the fifty subnational entities of the United States of America that share Sovereignty with the federal government California ( is a US state on the West Coast of the United States, along the Pacific Ocean. Year 1992 ( MCMXCII) was a Leap year starting on Wednesday (link will display full 1992 Gregorian calendar) A statute is a formal written enactment of a Legislative authority that governs a Country, State, City, or County. It provides for a special motion which a defendant can file at the outset of a lawsuit to strike a complaint where the complaint arises from conduct that falls within the rights of petition or free speech. A defendant or defender ( Δ in Legal shorthand) is any party who is required to answer the Complaint of a Plaintiff In general use a complaint is an expression of displeasure such as poor service at a store or from a Local government, etc A petition is a request to change some thing most commonly made to a government official or public entity Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak freely without Censorship or Limitation. The statute expressly applies to any writing or speech made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law, but there is no requirement that the writing or speech be promulgated directly to the official body. It also applies to speech in a public forum about an issue of public interest and to any other petition or speech conduct about an issue of public interest.

The filing of an anti-SLAPP motion prevents the plaintiff from amending the complaint and stays all discovery. In Law, discovery is the pre-trial phase in a Lawsuit in which each party through the law of Civil procedure can request documents and other evidence If the special motion is denied, the filing of an appeal immediately stays the trial court proceedings as to each challenged cause of action. In Law, an appeal is a process for requesting a formal change to an official decision In the law a cause of action (sometimes called a claim) is a set of facts sufficient to justify a right to sue Defendants prevailing on an anti-SLAPP motion (including any subsequent appeal) are entitled to a mandatory award of reasonable attorney’s fees. More than 200 published court opinions have interpreted and applied California's anti-SLAPP law.

California's Code of Civil Procedure § 425.17 corrects abuse of the anti-SLAPP statute (CCP § 425.16). Signed into law on September 6, 2003, this statute prohibits anti-SLAPP motions in response to certain public interest lawsuits and class actions, and actions that arise from commercial statements or conduct. Events 3114 BC - According to the Proleptic Julian calendar the current era in the Maya Long Count Calendar started Year 2003 ( MMIII) was a Common year starting on Wednesday of the Gregorian calendar. Section 425.18, signed into law on October 6, 2005, was enacted to facilitate SLAPP victims in recovering their damages through a SLAPPback (malicious prosecution action) against the SLAPP filers and their attorneys after the underlying SLAPP has been dismissed. Events 105 BC - Battle of Arausio: The Cimbri inflict the heaviest defeat on the Roman army of Gnaeus Mallius Maximus Year 2005 ( MMV) was a Common year starting on Saturday (link displays full calendar of the Gregorian calendar.

The most current SLAPP case is presently ongoing in San Bernardino Superior Court. There, Nancy Bohl who is a licensed Marriage counselor who serves as the San Bernardino County sheriff's Psychologist is suing a newspaper for revealing what they considered various unsavory acts. The costs to the defendant Ray Pryke's newspaper are now approaching one half million dollars with no end in sight.

Other States

At least 25 other states and one territory have also enacted statutory protections against SLAPPs. These are Arkansas, Arizona, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah, and Washington. In Colorado and West Virginia, the courts have adopted protections against SLAPPs.

Federal

There is no direct equivalent of a SLAPP statute in U. S. federal law; the closest available remedy is the Noerr-Pennington doctrine in federal antitrust law. The Noerr-Pennington doctrine is a doctrine of United States Antitrust law set forth by the United States Supreme Court in a pair of cases which According to Canan and Pring, this situation is probably because of differences in pleading requirements between federal and state civil procedure. In Law as practiced in countries that follow the English model a pleading is a formal written statement filed with a Court by parties in a Civil action Civil procedure is the body of law that sets out the process that Courts will follow when hearing cases of a civil nature (a " Civil action " as opposed to

California and most states operate under a "code pleading" regime, in which a complaint must be quite specific as to the underlying factual contentions. In Law as practiced in countries that follow the English model a pleading is a formal written statement filed with a Court by parties in a Civil action Thus, there is less of a risk that an anti-SLAPP motion will kick out legitimate cases, because the burden is already on the plaintiff to research the factual foundation of their complaint before filing suit. In contrast, federal civil procedure operates under a more recent "notice pleading" regime, in which a complaint need only include a "short and plain" notice of the claims to be asserted. This system offers plaintiffs the advantage of suing first and discovering the underlying facts later without having to worry about statutes of limitations (which is still a major problem with code pleading). A statute of limitations is a Statute in a Common law Legal system that sets forth the maximum period of time after certain events that legal proceedings But notice pleading also has a severe disadvantage in that allowing the use of an anti-SLAPP motion would result in the dismissal of many legitimate cases.

However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has allowed California litigants to use their state's special motion in federal district courts located in California, in cases where the court is hearing at least one California state law claim through the doctrine of supplemental jurisdiction. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a federal court with Appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts District courts are a category of Courts which exists in several nations In Law, jurisdiction (from the Latin ius iuris meaning "law" and dicere meaning "to speak" is the practical Authority

Examples of SLAPPs

Oprah Winfrey, as defendant, won a SLAPP filed against her by the cattle industry. Oprah Gail Winfrey (born January 29 1954 often referred to simply as Oprah, is an American [3]

Barbra Streisand, as plaintiff, lost a SLAPP she filed against an aerial photographer involved in the California Coastal Records Project. Barbra Streisand (ˈstraɪsænd "STRY-sand" born April 24 1942 is an American Singer, Film and Theatre Actress The California Coastal Records Project documents the California coastline with aerial photos taken from a helicopter flying parallel to the shore Streisand v. Adelman Et al, in California Superior Court; Case SC077257 [4][5]

Kim Shewalter and other neighborhood activists, as defendants, won a SLAPP brought by apartment building owners because of the defendants' protest activities. Coltrain v. Shewalter

Barry King and another Internet poster, as defendants, won a SLAPP brought by corporate plaintiffs based on critical posts on an Internet financial message board. Global Telemedia v. Does

Kathi Mills won a SLAPP filed against her by the Atlanta Humane Society, Atlanta Humane Society v. Mills, in Gwinnett County (Georgia) Superior Court; case 01-A-13269-1 [6]

The Bank Julius Baer vs. Wikileaks lawsuit resulted in an injunction against Dynadot forcing it to "lock the wikileaks. The Bank Julius Baer vs Wikileaks lawsuit was filed by Bank Julius Baer against the website Wikileaks. org domain name",[7][8] although the cased was later dropped.

Further reading

See also

External links

References

  1. ^ George W. Pring and Penelope Canan, SLAPPs: Getting Sued for Speaking Out, (1996), 8-9.
  2. ^ See, e. g. , Cal. Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16 (e) (3) and (e) (4).
  3. ^ Cf. Howard F. Lyman's Mad Cowboy, 14–20.
  4. ^ Streisand Sues to Suppress Free Speech Protection
  5. ^ Streisand’s Lawsuit to Silence Coastal Website Dismissed
  6. ^ Atlanta Humane Society settles lawsuit
  7. ^ http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf
  8. ^ WikiLeak: Censorship threats from Lawyers Archives
© 2009 citizendia.org; parts available under the terms of GNU Free Documentation License, from http://en.wikipedia.org