Quote:
Originally Posted by Gzesh
Glad to hear you are a California litigator.
What do you think about suing for damages arising from denial of an ability to make income consisting of gambling winnings, something it seems pretty clear cannot be sued for directly.
So far as I know, no one has been served as yet.
I do expect there will be fairly quick motions to dismiss filed once someone is served.
I think damages is the most troubling part of the case. I had a client who was appearing in a stupid British bottom feeder tabloid click bait site (Daily Mail) due to run of the mill stuff but a tenuous connection to a stupid conspiracy theory, and we looked at the matter for defamation with defamation legal experts. The client was fuming and ready to sue.
The Defamation experts said that they only take employment cases, with clear provable damages... otherwise its not worth a potential jury verdict on the damages awarded for someone saying something bad about you. Although technically there may be defamation, a defamation action is typically expensive with limited financial payoff.
First, there must be causation. Damages must be proven to have resulted from the defamatory statements. There must be a cause and effect – damages resulting from the words. How did cheating cause Postle to lose income? 1 game closed (that would have closed due to covid anyway?) He can go play outside at numerous casinos in California today.
Secondly, juries will have difficulty ascertaining the financial impact of the damages. A business entity itself has no value for emotional distress. A reputation is hard to measure and prove to a jury.
In this era of crazy news cycle, will a jury says calling someone a cheater on twitter is really defamatory? I've seen 100s of crazier things said in 20 minutes i spent on twitter today.
In California, Anti-Slapp motion to strike are very strong- and they freeze discovery and entitle you to attorney fees. I imagine someone like ESPN and SVP would win easily.