Details of McCaw's AJR Suit

I think this little legal misadventure will draw an anti-SLAPP motion. I imagine Howard King's hourly rate is quite high, so Wendy could end up paying a hefty sum for the privilege of losing the motion and the case, and knowing her, the appeal.

How many times can you think of when a newspaper was a plaintiff in a defamation action, and in those rare instances sued only the reporter, not the publication? As some media reports have noted, this is pure intimidation.

I also read that Huff tried to get Paterno to submit written questions, and AJR denied that happened. I know who I believe between Huffy and AJR.

Most if not all of the alleged inaccuracies are in fact accurate, some of the claims of falsity stem not from the text, but from the News-Press' wilful (paranoid?) misreading of it (as in the passage where the text says a bunch of people left or were fired and the lawyers read it to suggest mass firings; mass exodus is so much more palatable, right?), and insofar as there may be alleged inaccuracy, it is not defamatory. The NP is going to take a whuppin' in the OC!

There used to be a doctrine about being libel-proof if your rep was so bad that it couldn't be further damaged, but I think that's been discredited. Perhaps it should be revived for this case.

Also of interest will be the question of circulation figures. While I would bet the anti-SLAPP motion will work so we won't get to find out, the complaint is suggesting that the AJR article hurt its business, so the NP is going to have to prove it with circulation, ads, etc. In this case it has the incentive to skew the numbers down (at least for the last month or two), whereas in the public eye to date, it has had the incentive to misrepresent its figures high. Could be fascinating.

We might also get to see that "survey" the NP has touted as showing the need to cure "bias". Again, this might prove to be a reason for the NP to fold its tent rather than expose the "survey" as some remote controlled unscientific worthless jumble of info.

What is fascinating about the Orange County suit is the attack on Roberts. Up to now McCaw has tried to squelch the flow of all information regarding how she has conducted her management of news. She has done so by citation of arguing her internal processes are all trade secrets and that employees are barred by their employment contract from disclosing what transpired this last summer and earlier leading to the "transition".

But now she has alleged and made an issue of what transpired making it all an issue central to the resolution of her libel action. I suggest she has waived a lot of her trade secret claims and laid herself open to full discovery of her current and former staff, her management and herself concerning all these matters.

The really chicken S&#$ side of it is that she essentially defames Roberts by all her allegations, assuming they are all untrue, but she can hide behind the litigation privilege from being liable for the libel. Also, by not naming him as a party in the action, she prevents him from appearing and fighting her. She essentially sets up a straw man, likely to seek finding that she would trumpet around SB to support her slant on the last six months.

One can only hope she gets SLAPPed down, i.e., penalized by a SLAPP motion, but only after some real irritating discovery by defense counsel, Howard King. Go Howard!!

Good to see the lawyers weighing in.

Two things: First, it's carved in stone that you can't libel the dead; one might argue that Wendy and the N-P meet the legal definition (i.e., lack of brain function).

Second, I say SLAPP her till it hurts. She is soooo ripe for it. This is going to be fun.

Dave is spot on in his assessment. The suit is as much an attack on Roberts as it is on Paterno. The discovery possibilities are plentiful, not to mention painful, for McCaw.

The other thing that struck me was how thin the complaint is. Virtually every allegation in the suit is highly disputable and unlikely to stand against vigorous discovery.

This case is a loser; the only people who will profit, literally, are the lawyers. McCaw has let her obsession with vengeance upon Roberts and the rest place her in a most precarious position.

Mr. Moreno: I think McCaw knows she has a "most precarous position" in her suits. She just wants to drive Jerry Roberts and others to the poor house, by forcing them to hire lawyers. She knows she can outlast them money wise. She is a pityful creature who is so unhappy with herself that she is living by the old saying "misery loves company". All that money she has can't buy her anything but more trouble and more lawyers to egg her on. How sad. She could do a lot of good with those billions.

The real benefit of posting the actual complaint in this case is that up until now, there has been no "sunlight" on any of the NewsSupress litigation (Greg Parker, coastal commission, Barry Berkus, etc.) as it has all been done under closed arbitration rules. Now, McCaw has had to show her cards, and they are a pretty poor hand. In addition, it is interesting that the selected venue is Orange County. Not sure what the connection is, but probably it was filed there because the lawyers thought it would be a friendlier forum than LA or SB. Let the SLAPPs begin.

Any insurance wonks out there know what types of insurance (homeowner's, business, umbrella) would normally pay for a legal defense against a suit Wendy files for my `McCaw Obey the Law' sign?

Just to keep us straight on the nonmenclature, a SLAPP is a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.

The Good Guys (and Dolls) would want to be sponsoring an Anti-SLAPP suit. And not a moment too soon.

--virtual parsing and nuance

For more info on the whole anti-SLAPP thing, everyone should check out www.casp.net. They've got tons of info and even a place where you can report a SLAPP suit (which is actually linked in the story above).

SHE IS A MR. TOAD'S WILD RIDE! She needs a calmer groove and to learn we share one planet. She is toxic. http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:WhBv...

FROM THE LAWSUIT: “This statement is untrue in numerous respects, including, without limitation, the statement that there was a dismissal or resignation of five publishers that resulted from the violation of a promise made by Mrs. McCaw and/or that she was responsible for destroying families and livelihoods by virtue of such breach…”

REBUTTAL: It’s Christmastime, and as a former employee at the News-Press, I’ve been reflecting a lot these last few weeks on how my life has been destroyed by Wendy McCaw. Hence, I take great exception to the above.
Since I left my job there to protect my reputation as a journalist, but more importantly, as a human being, here are just a few of the things that have happened to me: I lost my home in Santa Barbara. I took a job living hours away from my family and friends just to be employed. I was forced into debt to meet my expenses on a lower salary. My relationship is on the rocks due to distance, and I’m constantly filled with anxiety and apprehension about the future. Every single day I work hard at my new job and try to figure out a better plan to get back to being happy and financially solvent. But right now, I’m not. And that is 100 percent Wendy McCaw’s fault. Let me know when I get to testify.

Any hope of getting the links to .pdf files like the one in this article to Ampersand's suit against Paterno fixed? You have a lot of real important primary files concerning the News-Press Mess. I bet they don't make you any money, but they are super important as a reference. Perhaps I could put the files in Wikisource, or maybe they could go in the Memory Hole... thanks for your time! best, snug