Defendants: How To Win A Defamation Case Without Filing An Anti-SLAPP Motion Or Going To Trial

As I sit here and enjoy another sunny day in Los Angeles, California, I think to myself, "man, I'm lucky." I get to litigate cases which intrigue me, and get to help people resolve their disputes without resorting to self-help (in most instances).

But you're not here to listen to my idle musings.

You're reading this because you want to know what's the single biggest weapon to knock out a defamation lawsuit post-anti-SLAPP motion.

Now, my guess is that you've probably already tried filing an anti-SLAPP motion and you lost . . .

And . . .

You don't want to go trial because you know it's a big risk and it could end up costing you a lot of money (aside from the attorney's fees).

So what is this weapon of choice in defamation cases?

It's the almighty Motion for Summary Judgment.

What you might know is that it has the potential to knock out each of your opponent's claims.

However, what you might not know is that it is particularly potent in the defamation and/or invasion of privacy context.

Specifically, courts have held that:

"Summary judgment is a favored remedy in defamation and invasion-of-privacy cases due to the chilling effect of protracted litigation on First Amendment rights."

and . . .

“[T]he courts impose more stringent burdens on one who opposes the motion and require a showing of high probability that the plaintiff will ultimately prevail in the case. In the absence of such showing, the courts are inclined to grant the motion and do not permit the case to proceed past the summary judgment stage.”

The message is clear to defendants:

All things being equal, the court is likely to rule in your favor.

I just shared an extremely important piece information with you that most attorneys don't even know about. If you enjoyed it, and you want to get more great information, click here to get the "Ultimate Beginner's Guide To Defamation Law."

 

Don't Let The Court Give Your Adversary Special Treatment

Every once and a while I come across a pro se litigant on the other side of the case (note: pro se litigant means someone who is representing him or herself), and this can be a good thing, but it can also be a major irritant

On the positive end, as a lawyer, you have a tremendous advantage against your adversary and you can really do a number on him or her if they don't follow proper procedure. However, it can be a real pain in the neck because pro se litigants often times make strange arguments (which causes you to do additional research), and courts often give self-represented litigants wider latitude to make procedural errors.

But you can (and you should) remind the court that the California Supreme Court has held that pro se litigants are not entitled to special treatment and are not exempted from the Code of Civil Procedure or the Rules of Court.

This could have a major impact on your case. For example, it could determine whether a court will sustain a demurrer with or without leave to amend. Or, it could determine the outcome of an anti-SLAPP motion if the defendant failed to properly judicially notice a key document.

Remember this the next time you square up against a pro se party.

If you liked this post please subscribe to the California Defamation Newsletter to get a Free copy of the "Ultimate Beginner's Guide To Defamation Law."