-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
- Status
Veronica1228
Senior Member
Now ladies, you know perfectly well that there is no fighting over men allowed in the WOW sisterhood. Keep it up and we will have to do a King Solomon.
Nana, nana, nannaENASNI said:you know I looooove strawberries... I will be counting the days till it's release.. lose the canuck Judge.... I will lose the mulberry tree... I promise cross my heart and hope to die!
Doc.. get lost I am flirting here...
ENASNI SLIPED ON A BANANA
Veronica1228
Senior Member
Yes, it looks like rmet is the clear winner. Come and claim your prize, Your Honor!
M
meganproser
Guest
Veronica wrote: "If you don't believe us then take this to your attorney and ask him/her" and later wrote, "He asked for advice, we gave him advice"
“Don’t believe US?” “WE gave him advice?” Veronica you and Insane each posted to this thread 13 times and neither of you offered a word of original, legitimate information regarding OP’s concerns.
In fact Ronnie, in the few posts where you DID address the unfailingly polite OP’s concerns, you made it a point to insult and demean him. Don’t try to put yourself in the same category as those who have tried to answer his question or advise him.
“Don’t believe US?” “WE gave him advice?” Veronica you and Insane each posted to this thread 13 times and neither of you offered a word of original, legitimate information regarding OP’s concerns.
In fact Ronnie, in the few posts where you DID address the unfailingly polite OP’s concerns, you made it a point to insult and demean him. Don’t try to put yourself in the same category as those who have tried to answer his question or advise him.
Veronica1228
Senior Member
WOW. Are you an idiot or something? Can you read? If you go back to my very first post on this thread you will see me trying to offer advice, which was repeated by other members who agreed with me. All of your other allegations are false and I don't have to justify myself to you.meganproser said:
One more thing. My name is not Ronnie. I saw you talking to another poster last weekend and calling her Ronnie, but it wasn't me. You were probably too stupid to realize that she wasn't me. Many of us spent a great deal of time laughing at you about it because we knew you were making that error. It's funny how very few people like you around here.
I wonder why that is?
And just what is your advice to OP?meganproser said:
On second thought, Please don't give him any advice, it is very clear that he needs to persue his claim in RI and since he was disabled in child hood, a GAL there and access to his Trust, which should be a special needs trust. While he may live in FL, his disability is confusing him in his efforet to appropriately pursue his inheiritance in RI.
F
forumguest
Guest
I have researched this question further. It is right on the line. My father
hired a high profile law firm in Florida with plenty of PR talent. So here is the situation. Technically it is not defamation but not for the reasons many have said. It is not defamation but it is defamation. How is that? The law firm has immunity because the statement was made in preparation of a lawsuit and thus is considered to be part of a Judicial proceeding.
Florida law says:
(4) Statements made during a judicial proceeding are absolutely privileged, provided that such statements are related to the proceeding's subject matter.
The privilege arises upon the doing of any act necessarily preliminary to judicial proceedings." Burton v. Salzberg, 725 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
I had originally thought that because no lawsuit was filed that the statement was not made during Judicial Proceedings. But in Florida unlike in California when a lawyer is preparing to go to court against someone then the statement is considered to be a statement made during a judicial proceeding.
The purpose of the judicial proceeding privilege is to promote candid and honest communication between the parties and their counsel in order to resolve disputes, Knight, 20 Utah 2d at 244-45, 436 P.2d at 803, and the privilege is premised on the assumption that the judicial system requires free and open expression, and that this will only occur if participants are not inhibited by the risk of subsequent defamation suits.
Levin, Middlebrooks, 639 So. 2d at 608 (citations omitted). The court stated that immunity did not abolish all remedies for defamation in the context of judicial proceedings. The courts, the bar association and the state all retain power to curb abuses. "In particular, a trial court would have the ability to use its contempt powers to vindicate its authority and protect its integrity by imposing a compensatory fine as punishment for contempt." Id. at 608-09.
1. We note here that although an attorney is normally absolutely immune from civil liability for defamatory statements made in the course of a judicial proceeding, the privilege does not prevent professional discipline against the attorney for such conduct in deserving circumstances. See, e.g., Kirschstein v. Haynes.
In other words, they started the lawsuit game and they thought without the other side knowing because it is such an esoteric area of law that I or if I had a lawyer would never be able to figure it out.
Well, now that the games have begun and I have researched the rules of the game my next move is to file a bar complaint against the law firm for defamation. That law firm has obviously in preparation for the expected lawsuit by me prepared defenses. So I will file and estimated 20 page complaint with the Florida Bar with around 100 questions for the law firm to answer such as... what are any and all of their defenses? And a copy of any and all papers they and their client used to determine things and that the law firm has done in preparation of the lawsuit.
And/ or I could file a malicious prosecution lawsuit against the law firm according to Florida case law.
And as far as I read the Bar rules the law firm if the Bar accepts the complaint and sends them a copy of it and asks them to reply then they have to answer every question in writing to the Bar with a copy to me. And that is just round 1.
So in short I get to have discovery before the lawsuit is even filed. Usually a high profile law firm would motion to not give discovery but under that Bar rule they are required to, thus I win round 1 if the Florida Bar Association accepts the complaint against the law firm
And it is defamation.
Slander is a false and unprivileged publication made orally either in person or by radio or television or by any other means which charges any person with crime, or with having been indicted, convicted, or punished for crime, imputes to a party the present existence of an infectious, contagious, or loathsome disease (Cal.Civ.Code § 4)
Intentional Torts - Defamation
Defamation is an invasion of the interest in reputation of a person or a group of persons resulting from libel or slander. (Cal.Civ.Code § 44)
Slander is a false and unprivileged publication made orally either in person or by radio or television or by any other means which charges any person with crime, or with having been indicted, convicted, or punished for crime, imputes to a party the present existence of an infectious, contagious, or loathsome disease, tends directly to injure a party in respect to such person's office, profession, trade or business, either by imputing to such party general disqualification in those respects which the office or other occupation peculiarly requires, or by imputing something with reference to the office, profession, trade, or business that has a natural tendency to lessen its profits, imputes to such person impotence or a want of chastity and by natural consequence, causes actual damage. (Cal.Civ.Code § 46)
DEFAMATION--LIBEL PER SE
A written statement is defamatory on its face if the natural and probable effect on the average reader is to defame the plaintiff without the necessity of considering the surrounding circumstances. (Cal.Civ.Code § 45a)
An oral statement is defamatory on its face if it charged plaintiff with a crime imputes in plaintiff the present existence of an infectious, contagious, or loathsome disease tends directly to injure plaintiff in respect to his her office, profession, trade or business, either by imputing to him her general disqualification in those respects which the office or other occupation peculiarly requires, or by imputing something with reference to his or her office, profession, trade or business that has a natural tendency to lessen its profits imputes to him or her impotence or want of chastity.
If a statement is not defamatory on its face, but nonetheless under all circumstances is defamatory, plaintiff must establish that he or she has sustained special damages in order to also recover general damages.
LIBEL/SLANDER--TRUTH IS AN ABSOLUTE DEFENSE
An essential element of defamation by libel slander is that the statement published was false. Consequently, if the statement was, in fact true, there can be no defamation, regardless of defendant's motivation. Truth is an absolute defense to a claim of libel.
CONDITIONAL PRIVILEGE
A conditional privilege is a defense to an action for defamation, unless the defendant abused the privilege when publishing the statement.
A privilege is abused when a defendant publishes a defamatory statement about plaintiff, without a good faith belief in the truth of the statement; or without reasonable grounds for believing the statement true; or motivated by hatred or ill will towards plaintiff. Plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence all of the facts necessary to establish that the privilege was abused by defendant.
hired a high profile law firm in Florida with plenty of PR talent. So here is the situation. Technically it is not defamation but not for the reasons many have said. It is not defamation but it is defamation. How is that? The law firm has immunity because the statement was made in preparation of a lawsuit and thus is considered to be part of a Judicial proceeding.
Florida law says:
(4) Statements made during a judicial proceeding are absolutely privileged, provided that such statements are related to the proceeding's subject matter.
The privilege arises upon the doing of any act necessarily preliminary to judicial proceedings." Burton v. Salzberg, 725 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
I had originally thought that because no lawsuit was filed that the statement was not made during Judicial Proceedings. But in Florida unlike in California when a lawyer is preparing to go to court against someone then the statement is considered to be a statement made during a judicial proceeding.
The purpose of the judicial proceeding privilege is to promote candid and honest communication between the parties and their counsel in order to resolve disputes, Knight, 20 Utah 2d at 244-45, 436 P.2d at 803, and the privilege is premised on the assumption that the judicial system requires free and open expression, and that this will only occur if participants are not inhibited by the risk of subsequent defamation suits.
Levin, Middlebrooks, 639 So. 2d at 608 (citations omitted). The court stated that immunity did not abolish all remedies for defamation in the context of judicial proceedings. The courts, the bar association and the state all retain power to curb abuses. "In particular, a trial court would have the ability to use its contempt powers to vindicate its authority and protect its integrity by imposing a compensatory fine as punishment for contempt." Id. at 608-09.
1. We note here that although an attorney is normally absolutely immune from civil liability for defamatory statements made in the course of a judicial proceeding, the privilege does not prevent professional discipline against the attorney for such conduct in deserving circumstances. See, e.g., Kirschstein v. Haynes.
In other words, they started the lawsuit game and they thought without the other side knowing because it is such an esoteric area of law that I or if I had a lawyer would never be able to figure it out.
Well, now that the games have begun and I have researched the rules of the game my next move is to file a bar complaint against the law firm for defamation. That law firm has obviously in preparation for the expected lawsuit by me prepared defenses. So I will file and estimated 20 page complaint with the Florida Bar with around 100 questions for the law firm to answer such as... what are any and all of their defenses? And a copy of any and all papers they and their client used to determine things and that the law firm has done in preparation of the lawsuit.
And/ or I could file a malicious prosecution lawsuit against the law firm according to Florida case law.
And as far as I read the Bar rules the law firm if the Bar accepts the complaint and sends them a copy of it and asks them to reply then they have to answer every question in writing to the Bar with a copy to me. And that is just round 1.
So in short I get to have discovery before the lawsuit is even filed. Usually a high profile law firm would motion to not give discovery but under that Bar rule they are required to, thus I win round 1 if the Florida Bar Association accepts the complaint against the law firm
And it is defamation.
Slander is a false and unprivileged publication made orally either in person or by radio or television or by any other means which charges any person with crime, or with having been indicted, convicted, or punished for crime, imputes to a party the present existence of an infectious, contagious, or loathsome disease (Cal.Civ.Code § 4)
Intentional Torts - Defamation
Defamation is an invasion of the interest in reputation of a person or a group of persons resulting from libel or slander. (Cal.Civ.Code § 44)
Slander is a false and unprivileged publication made orally either in person or by radio or television or by any other means which charges any person with crime, or with having been indicted, convicted, or punished for crime, imputes to a party the present existence of an infectious, contagious, or loathsome disease, tends directly to injure a party in respect to such person's office, profession, trade or business, either by imputing to such party general disqualification in those respects which the office or other occupation peculiarly requires, or by imputing something with reference to the office, profession, trade, or business that has a natural tendency to lessen its profits, imputes to such person impotence or a want of chastity and by natural consequence, causes actual damage. (Cal.Civ.Code § 46)
DEFAMATION--LIBEL PER SE
A written statement is defamatory on its face if the natural and probable effect on the average reader is to defame the plaintiff without the necessity of considering the surrounding circumstances. (Cal.Civ.Code § 45a)
An oral statement is defamatory on its face if it charged plaintiff with a crime imputes in plaintiff the present existence of an infectious, contagious, or loathsome disease tends directly to injure plaintiff in respect to his her office, profession, trade or business, either by imputing to him her general disqualification in those respects which the office or other occupation peculiarly requires, or by imputing something with reference to his or her office, profession, trade or business that has a natural tendency to lessen its profits imputes to him or her impotence or want of chastity.
If a statement is not defamatory on its face, but nonetheless under all circumstances is defamatory, plaintiff must establish that he or she has sustained special damages in order to also recover general damages.
LIBEL/SLANDER--TRUTH IS AN ABSOLUTE DEFENSE
An essential element of defamation by libel slander is that the statement published was false. Consequently, if the statement was, in fact true, there can be no defamation, regardless of defendant's motivation. Truth is an absolute defense to a claim of libel.
CONDITIONAL PRIVILEGE
A conditional privilege is a defense to an action for defamation, unless the defendant abused the privilege when publishing the statement.
A privilege is abused when a defendant publishes a defamatory statement about plaintiff, without a good faith belief in the truth of the statement; or without reasonable grounds for believing the statement true; or motivated by hatred or ill will towards plaintiff. Plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence all of the facts necessary to establish that the privilege was abused by defendant.
Last edited:
- Status
Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!
Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">