• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Jury awards 11 mil in an internet defamation case

mzkhadir

Diamond Member
USAToday

A Florida woman has been awarded $11.3 million in a defamation lawsuit against a Louisiana woman who posted messages on the Internet accusing her of being a "crook," a "con artist" and a "fraud."
Legal analysts say the Sept. 19 award by a jury in Broward County, Fla. ? first reported Friday by the Daily Business Review ? represents the largest such judgment over postings on an Internet blog or message board. Lyrissa Lidsky, a University of Florida law professor who specializes in free-speech issues, calls the award "astonishing."

Lidsky says the case could represent a coming trend in court fights over online messages because the woman who won the damage award, Sue Scheff of Weston, Fla., pursued the case even though she knew the defendant, Carey Bock of Mandeville, La., has no hope of paying such an award. Bock, who had to leave her home for several months because of Hurricane Katrina, couldn't afford an attorney and didn't show up for the trial.

"What's interesting about this case is that (Scheff) was so vested in being vindicated, she was willing to pay court costs," Lidsky says. "They knew before trial that the defendant couldn't pay, so what's the point in going to the jury?"

Scheff says she wanted to make a point to those who unfairly criticize others on the Internet. "I'm sure (Bock) doesn't have $1 million, let alone $11 million, but the message is strong and clear," Scheff says. "People are using the Internet to destroy people they don't like, and you can't do that."

The dispute between the two women arose after Bock asked Scheff for help in withdrawing Bock's twin sons from a boarding school in Costa Rica. Bock had disagreed with her ex-husband over how to deal with the boys' behavior problems. Against Bock's wishes, he had sent the boys to the boarding school.

Scheff, who operates a referral service called Parents Universal Resource Experts, says she referred Bock to a consultant who helped Bock retrieve her sons. Afterward, Bock became critical of Scheff and posted negative messages about her on the Internet site Fornits.com, where parents with children in boarding schools for troubled teens confer with one another.

In 2003, Scheff sued Bock for defamation. Bock hired a lawyer, but he left the case when she no longer could afford to pay him.

When Katrina hit in August 2005, Bock's house was flooded and she moved temporarily to Texas before returning to Louisiana last June. Court papers that Scheff and her attorney David H. Pollack mailed to Bock were returned to Pollack's office in Miami.

After Bock didn't offer a defense, a Broward Circuit Court judge found in favor of Scheff. A jury then heard Scheff's arguments about damages. Pollack did not seek a specific amount for the harm he says Scheff's business suffered.

"Even with no opposing counsel and no defendant there, $11 million is a huge amount," says Pollack, adding that Scheff is considering whether to try to collect any money from Bock. "The jury determined this was a significant enough issue. It's not just somebody's feelings are hurt; it's somebody's reputation is ruined."

Bock says that when she moved back to her repaired house over the summer, she knew the trial was approaching but did not know the date. She says she doesn't have the money to pay the judgment or hire a lawyer to appeal it. She adds that if the goal of Scheff's lawsuit was to stifle what Bock says online, it worked.

"I don't feel like I can express my opinions," Bock says. "Only one side of the story was told in court. Nobody heard my side."

Posted 10/10/2006 10:07 PM ET
 
Bock, who had to leave her home for several months because of Hurricane Katrina, couldn't afford an attorney and didn't show up for the trial.

Easy to win they don;t show, let alone have a attorney.
 
we are soooooooo screwed, all of us that ever posted a "STFU" or anything, we are going down 🙁 🙁 🙁
 
Damn, this is rediculous. 11.3 million dollars for calling someone a crook? People that sue broke people for 'crimes' that aren't even crimes ARE crooks. So sue me. I might be poor as ******, but damn, I know a good lawyer.
 
Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
Originally posted by: chambersc
broken law deserves compensation...where's the issue?

its likely that such a verdict will be found unconstitutional

i don't think so. with what is said in blogs nowadays it really could hurt a persons career. defamation and libel shouldn't be toyed with.
 
Originally posted by: amish
Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
Originally posted by: chambersc
broken law deserves compensation...where's the issue?

its likely that such a verdict will be found unconstitutional

i don't think so. with what is said in blogs nowadays it really could hurt a persons career. defamation and libel shouldn't be toyed with.

I disagree. Based on the nature of her job, I find it hard to imagine that the blog entry cost her $11 worth of damages.
 
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
Originally posted by: chambersc
broken law deserves compensation...where's the issue?

its likely that such a verdict will be found unconstitutional

do you think it'll be knocked down or thrown out altogether?

(If the Defendant wasnt judgment proof) I would imagine there would be a remitter hearing where the $ would be knocked down. There doesnt seem to be a legitimate basis to throw out the case.
 
Originally posted by: chambersc
Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
Originally posted by: chambersc
broken law deserves compensation...where's the issue?

its likely that such a verdict will be found unconstitutional

do you think it'll be knocked down or thrown out altogether?

You're not asking me, but I'll answer anyway.

I don't believe the judgement should be thrown out altogether, for the simple reason that the defendant did not present any defense.

If she HAD, I still feel that a judgement against her is warranted if her statements negatively affected the plaintiff's business.

I think a judgement of $11.3 million is absurd. I have to wonder if the plaintiff will make that much money in her entire life.
 
That's absolutely criminal to award that crooked fraudulent pedophiliac bribing extortionist dirtbag $11m. :|


😉 (<-- respective cya emoticon 😛)

 
Back
Top