You probably know by now that Courtney Love got sued last March for alleged defamatory Tweets. The allegations are THE MOST OUTRAGEOUS that I have ever seen. I sure hope that they’re not true for Ms. Love’s sake.
Anyhow, here’s an update on the case: Opposing counsel (the attorney representing the plaintiff) has amended the complaint and filed a first amended complaint. Now, anyone who knows anything about litigation knows this is par for the course, i.e., there’s nothing unique about this. However, what is interesting is that counsel dropped two claims entirely.
The plaintiff is no longer suing for breach of contract with regard to Etsy, a website for independent designers, which Love used to find out about the plaintiff. Plaintiff seemed to be saying that Love violated Etsy’s Terms of Use and that plaintiff had standing to sue since she was an intended third party beneficiary under Etsy’s Terms of Use — not a fantastic argument, but not bad. Seems like it was unnecessary given the more potent libel claim and the claim for intentional interference with prospective business advantage.
The second claim which was dropped from the lawsuit was for intentional infliction of emotional distress. This really boggles my mind. If ever there was a case for an emotional distress claim, this would be the one.
I can probably venture a couple of guesses why counsel decided to drop the emotional distress claim, but that would boring. Instead, I’d like to know what you think.
Why do you think the designer’s lawyer dropped the emotional distress claim from the lawsuit?
Leave a Reply