The other side in a case an ex-employee, posted verifiably false accusations against my client and his business on social media. Then played games on retracting it and posted a sarcastic non-retraction retraction.
My client took issue with this game playing and after our demand for a retraction was met with this games the other side was sued.
Note: posting clearly false accusations against someone on social media can get you in quite a bit of trouble especially when it goes out to over a thousand people.
So we sue. Since the other side made false accusations of criminal activity that’s defamation per se so damages are presumed , punitive damages and attorneys fees can be awarded and the other side’s attorney realizes how badly hosed they are.
So settlement talks begin and we make a very fair offer of a posted retraction and apology and payment of attorney fees to date.
Of course, the other side wants to play games. Other side as this is going on stupidly sends texts to third parties about how she’s not really going to settle or really post the retraction. Note that is all admissible and vividly illustrates bad faith, and a friendly third party gives us a heads up about it. Other side doesn’t know that we know.
So they delay and delay, and today we said enough is enough. Either they end the games or the case goes on and by the way, she needs to preserve and turn over all communications she has had with third parties about the case.
Other side’s Attorney then responds that well, "then she’ll just file bankruptcy and you won’t get anything". Note he specializes in bankruptcy and apparently is a friend of a friend of the defendant so that’s how he’s involved.
I replied that he may want to advise his client that intentional torts such as her acts of defamation are non-dischargeable in bankruptcy so we can litigate it there too. Not a problem for us.
Sucks when you bluff and the other side knows you’re not holding any cards, doesn’t it?
After a couple hours, likely where he read his client the riot act about talking about the case via text to people other than her attorney, they just came back with a far more serious settlement offer.
Some days this job is rather satisfying.
2 comments:
Yay, finally a win for the good guys!!!
This is why it always, always pays to hire a competent attorney. I went through a divorce in 1990, hired a cheap lawyer. About 3 years later, I took the divorce papers to a competent lawyer, who said 2 things. First thing,
" J.C., you sure got screwed." And then, " there is nothing I can do to change it."
I also hired an attorney to advise me as the executor of my dad's estate. He was VERY expensive, and worth twice as much as he charged. You live and you learn.
Post a Comment