Falsely Claiming Lawsuit in Progress

[libellous]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY

Can anyone point me in the direction of where to do my research regarding whether or not it would be construed as libel if a supposed claimant claims he/she is currently in litigation with a party, while there is actually no litigation?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NY

Can anyone point me in the direction of where to do my research regarding whether or not it would be construed as libel if a supposed claimant claims he/she is currently in litigation with a party, while there is actually no litigation?

Thanks in advance!

Ask your prof...

 

[libellous]

Ask your prof...

I'm not currently a law student, I am undergrad :/

 

[quincy]

What is the claimed reason for the litigation and who is being told of this litigation?

Having someone falsely say they are involved in a lawsuit with someone, with nothing more than that, may or may not rise to the level of defamation. And, depending on whom this false fact is communicated to, whether defamatory or not, it may not be actionable defamation.

 

[libellous]

What is the claimed reason for the litigation and who is being told of this litigation?

Having someone falsely say they are involved in a lawsuit with someone, with nothing more than that, may or may not rise to the level of defamation. And, depending on whom this false fact is communicated to, whether defamatory or not, it may not be actionable defamation.

The claimed reason for litigation is failing to provide acceptable level of service.

The "supposed" claimant writes publically they are in litigation for the "defendant's" failure in services, and goes in depth on what specific "failures of service" the claim is over.

The false fact is communicated on a public review website.

While I am not counting on the defamation being winnable, I am trying to determine if it would be actionable, which would then violate the website's terms and conditions.

 

[quincy]

First, many websites will not remove content without a court order to do so, and a court will not often order the removal of content until a suit has been filed, evidence presented, and/or a lawsuit won.

Even when the terms of service of a website prohibit the posting of defamatory content, truth and opinion are protected forms of speech. A website is generally not in a position to tell truth from falsehood or opinion from fact, and most websites will not want to delete potentially protected comments or criticisms until a court has determined the content is defamatory.

Content posted on public review websites can be problematic, as most review sites are looked at by visitors to the site as "opinion" sites and not necessarily posted facts. It takes a review of the review and its context, and the extent of reputational injury (if any) that has been caused by the written words, to determine if there is a suit worth pursuing.

A "failure to provide services" could be viewed as defamatory, depending on what services are involved and the duty or responsibility of the targeted person to provide these services. And, again, it would depend on how exactly the review is worded.

What you really need to do is have an attorney in your area look over the review and review site, to better determine if there is any legal action available to pursue and, if so, whether a threat to sue based on this available legal action could be enough to have the content voluntarily deleted by the reviewer.

I have listed some sites below which provide general information that many find useful when researching defamation law (most are media-based, but give good overviews of the law). For advice specific to your own situation, however, it still would take an attorney's personal review of the facts particular to your case.

Reporter's Committee for Freedom of the Press, rcfp.org

Knight Citizen News Network, kcnn.org/legal_risk (click on the Rules and the "read more")

Electronic Frontier Foundation, eff.org

Citizen Media Law Project, citmedialaw.org


Good luck.

 

[libellous]

First, many websites will not remove content without a court order to do so, and a court will not often order the removal of content until a suit has been filed, evidence presented, and/or a lawsuit won.

Even when the terms of service of a website prohibit the posting of defamatory content, truth and opinion are protected forms of speech. A website is generally not in a position to tell truth from falsehood or opinion from fact, and most websites will not want to delete potentially protected comments or criticisms until a court has determined the content is defamatory.

Content posted on public review websites can be problematic, as most review sites are looked at by visitors to the site as "opinion" sites and not necessarily posted facts. It takes a review of the review and its context, and the extent of reputational injury (if any) that has been caused by the written words, to determine if there is a suit worth pursuing.

A "failure to provide services" could be viewed as defamatory, depending on what services are involved and the duty or responsibility of the targeted person to provide these services. And, again, it would depend on how exactly the review is worded.

What you really need to do is have an attorney in your area look over the review and review site, to better determine if there is any legal action available to pursue and, if so, whether a threat to sue based on this available legal action could be enough to have the content voluntarily deleted by the reviewer.

I have listed some sites below which provide general information that many find useful when researching defamation law (most are media-based, but give good overviews of the law). For advice specific to your own situation, however, it still would take an attorney's personal review of the facts particular to your case.

Reporter's Committee for Freedom of the Press, rcfp.org

Knight Citizen News Network, kcnn.org/legal_risk (click on the Rules and the "read more")

Electronic Frontier Foundation, eff.org

Citizen Media Law Project, citmedialaw.org


Good luck.

Thank you very much for the informative answer and for pointing me in the correct direction!

I have had a few reviews/comments removed due to violations of terms of service, but I am by no means a lawyer and seek the proper counsel

 

[quincy]

Whether content will be removed upon request really depends on the website.

Forums are often more willing to delete objectionable postings to appease posters to the site while review sites are generally reluctant to remove any negative information without proof first of its falsity.

It never hurts to file a complaint with a site and request the removal of material, and that is generally the best first step to take, but these requests can be, and often are, denied.

Good luck with your situation, libellous.