Why can’t I find a lawyer to take my defamation case?
If personally, or with something involving your organization, your reputation for honesty or competence has been defamed by an upset customer, former employee or competitor, who wouldn’t want to tackle this situation head on? We all would and what often comes to mind is filing a lawsuit for defamation.
But when the winner of her town’s yearly Grilling Contest and the CEO of a small, Midwest IT firm spoke with lawyers about filing defamation suits, both were told “No, we’re not going to do this for you. It is just not in your best interest.”
“I had real proof,” each said on a phone call — still very upset — and asked, “I have the money to pay an attorney and want to teach those people a lesson. Why would a lawyer decline a solid case?”
So, if you have spoken with lawyers about filing a defamation lawsuit — and been turned down — today’s story will explain why lawyers often counsel their clients out of marching off to the courthouse, sending an inflammatory cease-and-desist letter, posting angry comments online or taking other forms of action.
The BBQ chef rubbed the wrong way
“Mr. Beaver, I am the victim of a nasty gossip campaign being conducted by several people who are jealous of me being awarded top BBQ chef in our town’s yearly grilling contest. This was the first time that I won it, and they are posting online that I cheated by duplicating commercially available rubs and BBQ sauces, which I did not!
“No one outside of our grilling community has said anything to me — yet — but I am afraid that will happen. I want to sue them for defamation but every lawyer I spoke with refused to take my case, saying they won’t do this and mentioned Barbara Streisand! But what does she have to do with this? Thanks, Alice.”
He copied customer lists and is bad-mouthing us
“All of our employees sign a statement acknowledging that customer information is confidential and owned exclusively by the company. They may access it in the course of their employment, but not copy, nor, if they leave us, use it to solicit our customers.
“But ‘Doug’ did just that! He copied the information, opened his own shop, and is contacting our customers, spreading untrue statements about us. But I can’t seem to get any attorney interested in helping us. Why? ‘Eric.’”
It’s called the Streisand effect
I ran my readers’ questions by Cleveland-based attorney Daniel Powell, managing attorney with Minc LLC. His firm is recognized as one of the country’s most accomplished in helping people and companies deal with internet defamation, content removal, harassment, consumer complaint/review removal, to list a few.
Their website is:Minclaw.com and offers a wealth of practical, highly useful information with YouTube videos. The material is so good, so informative, that I know of law professors who recommend it to their students.
Powell explained why experienced defamation lawyers urge caution to clients who want to immediately rush off and file suit. “Any time you are considering filing a defamation case, you must consider the possible risks of unwanted exposure the lawsuit may bring to the statements you allege to be defamatory and properly weigh those risks against the potential benefits of the lawsuit.”
Barbara Streisand’s huff backfired
In 2002, a photographer took more than 12,000 photos of the California coastline and placed them in an online database to document coastal erosion. Among them was one of Barbara Streisand’s blufftop estate. Streisand sued the photographer and the companies hosting the image, claiming an invasion of privacy and asking more than $50 million in damages.
“While the lawsuit was dismissed but her efforts to keep the property out of the public eye had the exact opposite effect,” Minc’s website points out, adding. “Records show that prior to filing suit, the image had been downloaded a total of 6 times — 2 by her attorneys.
“After the suit was filed, the image was downloaded more than 420,000 times in a single month!”
Called the “Streisand Effect,” Minc’s website notes, “The term has come to mean any attempt to suppress information that has the unintended consequence of creating greater interest in the subject than if nothing had been done. The Streisand Effect can be so damaging today as the internet allows for the spread of information never possible years ago.”
“I am not a crook!”
Who can forget Richard Nixon’s statement, “I am not a crook!” For readers old enough to have heard him say that, in view of Watergate and other scandals, many of us thought, “Oh, yes you are!”
“And that’s the problem with a shoot-fromthe-hip attitude about being too quick to file a defamation lawsuit,” Powell underscores. “You need to ask yourself if it is better to say nothing in a public setting than to expose these embarrassing issues to people who might never have heard a thing about them.”
Concluding our interview, Powell makes this point clear: “You should always jealously safeguard your reputation and may have no choice but to file suit for defamation, but this decision can only be reached after reviewing all considerations with your attorney.
“Lawsuits are costly and can be emotionally draining. Lawyers who care about their clients’ welfare provide proper counsel when going to court is not in your best interest.”