They are now suing another member of my family and the small construction company and I have about 20 days left to file a demurrer or an answer.
Back up a bit and explain how it is that you filed an answer more than a year ago and now you are getting ready to file another answer.
They know my family member that they are now adding as a defendant is ill and cannot leave home. I see only default on the horizon.
I don’t understand where you are in the litigation. Are you asking about your own options or the options of the new defendants?
If any defendant still has time to do so, should make a special appearance only and remove the case to Federal Court as YAG suggested. Once the case is in Federal Court, any defendant that can do so should object to CA jurisdiction. Any defendant that can still do so should move to dismiss for failure to state a claim. If they are asking for a million dollars, there is a sufficient amount in controversy.
“Verbal horseplay” is exactly what it was.
I used that term to mean “joking around” in a friendly manner.
One may call someone a liar if it's true and even if it isn't, it's not libel unless one knows it's provably false when they say it.
You are only half right. Whether you KNOW the statement is false or not, you can be held responsible for damages caused by a false statement.
The names did not state a provable fact and are opinion and hyperbole.
It depends on the context. If someone was insisting he’s never had any kind of STD and you called him a liar, depending on the context it could be taken as an implication that you have knowledge of defamatory facts.
The point is, the fact that someone can file an absurd lawsuit like this is an insult to attorneys
No one is worried about insulting attys, lol!
People will be afraid to say anything for fear of having to spend a fortune on defending something this ludicrous.
If what you said was really trivial, it is not likely to lead to problems. I suspect there is much more to this story.
They can't possibly have any real damages and, therefore, will not be able to produce any proof of any.
Calling someone a liar is not defamatory per se so there will be no presumption of damages. They will have to prove real damages but unfortunately, that is as easy as providing some records to indicate they’ve gone to the Dr.s for stress.
It is possible to defame a screen name. A screen name has a reputation which can be harmed. It makes no difference whether anyone knows the “legal” name behind the screen name.
Let me use this as an example: Quaere is a liar. <----There. Did I just commit libel?
Depends on the context.
How? What damages will Quaere suffer as a result of me stating my opinion that he is a liar?
It depends on what you were implying I was lying about, the extent of my involvement in the Internet community, etc. If your statement was capable of changing how others view me and the statement was false, I have damages. A jury may find that my damages are only worth $1.00, but if I want to take that risk and drag you through the courts, that is my right.
Which brings me to: It's my understanding that truth is an absolute defense, as is opinion. If SuedNSoCal can show that this person did lie, or, at least, SuedNSoCal thought he did, what more does he need?
“Thinking” something was true, is not a defense to defamation. It can mitigate damages, but it is not a defense.
While the case sounds absurd, I have to assume there is much more to it than "Sued" has shared.
BTW, I am not an atty Sued.