Club vs Club

[twopooches]

North Carolina - I would like to know the best way to handle a situation that has been active since we started our Mustang car club 1 year ago. Another local club has been publicly slandering our club and advocates harassment of our club within their own membership. The offending club president has even approached our members, making negative untrue comments about our club and saying they should join their club. This same person has even posted comments on forums and sent offensive emails to our members. Because of the difference in our clubs we never felt there would be a conflict and have even offered to co host in fundraisers etc.. The problem with this issue is... 1. It looks bad to the public. 2. Limits fundraising for local charities. 3. Is an overall headache. 4. Our members are offended by the harassment and unfounded negative comments. Please note our club does not require membership fees so our concern is not membership or fees. To date we have over 300 members. many of our members have or do maintain membership in both clubs. Our bottom line concern is that it is becoming a real issue detrimental to all in involved. Please note we have tried ignoring as well as cordial letters addressing the problem to the club president. Thank you in advance for your help.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Mass_Shyster]

Hopefully, Quincy will be along to answer your questions in more detail. In the meantime, I've got a few questions:

Is the Club a legal organization, or a bunch of people calling themselves the XYZ Mustang Club? If it's the latter, I don't know if the club has standing to sue for defamation, as it doesn't actually exist.

Is the other club an organization, or is this simply the actions of one person who is the president of this club? The question being: Who would you sue? The club or the president? If the club is simply a group calling themselves something, there may be no entity to name in a lawsuit.

Also, are there any monetary damages the club has suffered and are provable? The four items you listed do not appear to be monetary in nature, with the possible exception of damages to the organizations who would benefit from fundraising.

Someone else (Quincy?) can comment on the possible reputational injury.

I would collect $1 from each member and have an attorney send a cease and desist letter threatening legal action. With 300 members, I suspect one may even be a lawyer.

 

[quincy]

Although I have been waiting for answers to the questions asked by Stevef, I can address the issue of defamation as it applies to large groups, under which a 300 member group would fall.

From Prosser, Law of Torts (3d ed 1964), Chapter 21, pages 767-768:

"If the group is a very large one, as in the case of such words as 'all lawyers are shysters,' they are considered to have no application to anyone in particular, since one might as well defame all mankind. Not only does the group as such have no action, but the plaintiff does not establish any personal reference to himself. But if the plaintiff is the only lawyer present, or for some other reason the words are reasonably understood by the hearers to be directed individually at him, the personal application may be made to appear, by pleading and proof of the special circumstances by way of inducement, and the inneundo. The rule has been applied quite uniformly to comparatively large groups or classes of a definite number, exceeding, say twenty-five persons. When the group becomes smaller than that, as in the case of a jury, a family, an election board, or the four officers of an association, the courts have been willing to permit the conclusion that the finger of defamation is pointed at each individual..."

Identification is a necessary element of defamation. Without a personal application made of the defamatory statements to an individual in a large group, there is no individual cause of action that can arise. Individual members of a group do not have a cause of action based solely on membership in a group.

A case that may have some application to the situation as described here is Samson B. Mullins v Marlon Brando, 13 Cal App 3d. 409, 91 Cal Rptr. 796 (1970), a case that involved an unincorporated association of Oakland Police Department members - the members of which numbered around 650.

Of this action, the Brando Court said: "If no single member of the OPOA could have stated a cause of action against the defendant, neither can all of them together. Zero plus zero equals zero."

You can review with an attorney in your area all of the facts of the statements made by the one Mustang group against your Mustang group, however, to get a clearer indication of whether the words being communicated are, in fact, defamatory, and if any action can arise from the statements made. The attorney can also determine if a cease and desist letter would be appropriate or warranted based on a review and the facts.