Case 1:13-cv FDS Document 12 Filed 04/14/14 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. ) ) Civil No. v.

Similar documents
Case 1:14-cv FDS Document 24 Filed 06/26/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. ) ) Civil No. v.

Case 1:13-cv FDS Document 8 Filed 03/21/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. ) ) Civil No. v. ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

v. Record No OPINION BY JUSTICE ELIZABETH B. LACY February 27, 1998 COLLEGIATE TIMES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

Case 2:18-cv KJD-CWH Document 7 Filed 12/26/18 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:18-cv FDS Document 13 Filed 10/04/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:13-cv RHB Doc #14 Filed 04/17/14 Page 1 of 8 Page ID#88

Case 1:12-cv UU Document 61 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/30/2013 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 1:17-cv DPG Document 48 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/30/2018 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case: 1:18-cv Document #: 18 Filed: 10/03/18 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:55

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION CASE NO. 3:12-CV REDRIDGE FINANCE GROUP, LLC

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiffs, 1:11-CV-1533 (MAD/CFH)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 28 Filed: 11/02/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:216

Case 3:13-cv L Document 109 Filed 08/21/15 Page 1 of 11 PageID 3052

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Presently before the Court is Defendants Connecticut General

Plaintiff, 1:14-CV-0771 (LEK/RFT) Defendant. MEMORANDUM-DECISION and ORDER

Case 1:15-cv KLM Document 34 Filed 09/16/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 2:11-cv DDP-MRW Document 23 Filed 02/19/13 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:110 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:17-cv IT Document 47 Filed 02/12/18 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 2:11-cv JES-CM Document 196 Filed 08/18/14 Page 1 of 9 PageID 3358

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:17-cv RS Document 33 Filed 08/28/17 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION : : : : : : : : : : ORDER

Case 3:12-cv ARC Document 34 Filed 06/05/13 Page 1 of 9

EQEEL BHATTI, 1:16-cv-257. Defendants.

Case4:10-cv CW Document26 Filed08/13/10 Page1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

5:15-CV-1536 (LEK/TWD) MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER. against Defendants Joseph G. Joey DeMaio; Circle Song Music, LLC; God of Thunder

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY CENTRAL DIVISION (at Lexington) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) *** *** *** ***

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM & ORDER. April 25, 2017

Case 1:14-cv WYD-MEH Document 26 Filed 07/17/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 2:15-cv CDJ Document 31 Filed 03/16/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION : : : : : : : : : : ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARYLAND. On June 2, pro se Plaintiff Keyonna Ferrell ("Ferrell")

Case 3:10-cv MLC -DEA Document 10 Filed 06/24/10 Page 1 of 8 PageID: 112

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 21 Filed: 03/27/17 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:84

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

){

Case: 1:15-cv CAB Doc #: 14 Filed: 06/22/15 1 of 7. PageID #: 87 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv TNM Document 14 Filed 01/12/18 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

Case 1:16-cv APM Document 16 Filed 07/19/17 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Presently before the court is Defendant s Motion to Dismiss

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI EASTERN DIVISION. RYAN GALEY and REGINA GALEY

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x In re: Chapter 11

Case 1:17-cv FDS Document 48 Filed 09/06/17 Page 1 of 45 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:17-cv NMG Document 60 Filed 09/27/18 Page 1 of 18. United States District Court District of Massachusetts

Case 5:13-cv SMH-MLH Document 50 Filed 08/15/14 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 260

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA - Alexandria Division -

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case No. 8:13-cv-2428-T-33TBM ORDER

Plaintiff John Kelleher brings this action under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION. v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Case 1:14-cv LTS Document 41 Filed 07/24/15 Page 1 of 10

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. Plaintiff, OPINION

Case3:14-cv MEJ Document39 Filed10/30/14 Page1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION

: : Plaintiff James Tagliaferri, acting pro se, sues Matthew J. Szulik and Kyle M. Szulik

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:12-cv JCC-TRJ Document 27 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 19 PageID# 168

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendant.

Case 6:08-cv RAS Document 104 Filed 12/02/2008 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

RULING AND ORDER ON DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS. Gorss Motels, Inc. ( Gorss Motels or Plaintiff ) filed this class action Complaint on

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA GAINESVILLE DIVISION : : : : : : : : : : : : ORDER

Case 1:16-cv ESH Document 25 Filed 12/05/16 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION

Case 7:06-cv TJM-GJD Document 15 Filed 02/20/2007 Page 1 of 10. Plaintiff, Defendants. DECISION & ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA SPARTANBURG DIVISION ' '

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - versus - 14-cv Plaintiff, Defendant.

Case3:14-cv MEJ Document65 Filed02/25/15 Page1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION

Case 1:17-cv APM Document 13 Filed 11/16/17 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TYLER DIVISION

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 31 Filed: 01/20/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:144

Gordon Levey v. Brownstone Investment Group

Case SWH Doc 72 Filed 06/16/17 Entered 06/16/17 10:30:36 Page 1 of 8

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 24 Filed: 07/26/17 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:79 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Plaintiff Betty, Inc. ( Betty ), brings this action asserting copyright infringement and

Case 4:18-cv HSG Document 46 Filed 02/07/19 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:17-cv RS Document 39 Filed 01/18/18 Page 1 of 5

Case 1:16-cv KLM Document 26 Filed 07/05/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. Richmond Division. v. ) Civil Action No. 3:08-CV-799 MEMORANDUM OPINION

Case 1:11-cv RC Document 18 Filed 08/31/12 Page 1of6

Case 3:11-cv DPJ -FKB Document 26 Filed 01/05/12 Page 1 of 10

Case 7:12-cv VB Document 26 Filed 04/18/13 Page 1 of 11 : : : : : :

Case 1:13-cv SOM-KSC Document 79 Filed 10/23/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 637 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY OWENSBORO DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) OPINION AND ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. Plaintiff, Civil Action No (JBS-JS)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Transcription:

Case 1:13-cv-13122-FDS Document 12 Filed 04/14/14 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS MARA FELD, Plaintiff, Civil No. v. 13-13122-FDS CRYSTAL CONWAY, Defendant. SAYLOR, J. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS This action arises out of an allegedly defamatory tweet. 1 In November 2010, plaintiff Mara Feld arranged for her thoroughbred gelding, Munition, to be shipped to a horse farm. He was instead sent to a horse auction and may have eventually been slaughtered in Canada. Munition s fate became a topic of great debate on Internet sites dealing with horses. As part of that debate, defendant Crystal Conway posted the following message on her Twitter account: Mara Feld aka Gina Holt you are fucking crazy! Feld commenced this action against Conway on December 10, 2013, alleging defamation. Jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship. Conway has moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b(6, contending that the 1 A tweet is a posting from Twitter, a web application by which users post brief status messages, visible to the public generally, accessible at www.twitter.com. Senese v. Hindle, 2011 WL 4536955, at *5 n.28 (E.D.N.Y. Sep. 9, 2011. Tweets are limited to 140 characters. Joe Trevino, From Tweets to Twibel: Why the Current Defamation Law Does Not Provide for Jay Cutler s Feelings, 19 Sports Law. J. 49, 58 (2012.

Case 1:13-cv-13122-FDS Document 12 Filed 04/14/14 Page 2 of 6 complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 2 For the following reasons, the motion will be granted. I. Background The facts are stated as alleged in the complaint. Martha Feld is a citizen of Massachusetts. In November 2010, Feld arranged to have a horse dealer ship her thoroughbred gelding, Munition, to a horse farm in New Jersey where he would become a companion horse. She later learned that Munition was instead sent to a horse auction in New Holland, Pennsylvania. He may have subsequently been shipped to Canada and slaughtered. The horse s fate became a topic of great debate on Internet sites dealing with thoroughbred race horses. See Paula J. Owen, Fatal transactions; Sale of a horse can be a death sentence, Telegram & Gazette (Feb. 7, 2011, http://www.telegram.com/article/20110207/news/102070407/1101. Crystal Conway is a citizen of Kentucky. She is employed as a Bloodstock Agent at CC Bloodstock Services, a full-service thoroughbred breeding and consulting agency in Lexington, Kentucky. (Compl. 7. At some point, Conway became involved in the ongoing online discussion and debate concerning Munition s disappearance. Conway maintains a Twitter account with the user name Shesunskippable. On December 11, 2010, she posted on her Twitter account: Mara Feld aka Gina Holt you are fucking crazy! 2 Conway has also moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. Although courts should ordinarily satisfy jurisdictional concerns before addressing the merits of a civil action, where the affected defendant does not insist that the jurisdictional issue be determined first... the district court [can] eschew[] difficult jurisdictional and venue-related issues in favor of ordering dismissal on the merits. Feinstein v. Resolution Trust Corp., 942 F.2d 34, 40 (1st Cir. 1991. Because the jurisdictional determination involves difficult questions of how the Internet affects the personal jurisdiction analysis, the Court addresses the case on the merits. 2

Case 1:13-cv-13122-FDS Document 12 Filed 04/14/14 Page 3 of 6 Feld holds a doctorate in toxicology. Consequently, her professional career is dependent on the public review and endorsement of her publications. Peers, professors, prospective employers, and interested parties find her work by searching the Internet for her name. Conway s tweet can be found by searching for Feld s name with Internet search engines. Feld filed this case on December 10, 2013. The complaint alleges one count of defamation of character by libel. On March 21, 2014, Conway filed a motion to dismiss, contending that the complaint does not state a claim upon which relief can be granted. II. Standard of Review On a motion to dismiss, the Court must assume the truth of all well-plead[ed] facts and give plaintiff the benefit of all reasonable inferences therefrom. Ruiz v. Bally Total Fitness Holding Corp., 496 F.3d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 2007 (citing Rogan v. Menino, 175 F.3d 75, 77 (1st Cir. 1999. To survive a motion to dismiss, the complaint must state a claim that is plausible on its face. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007. In other words, the [f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level,... on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true (even if doubtful in fact. Id. at 555 (citations omitted. The plausibility standard is not akin to a probability requirement, but it asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556. Dismissal is appropriate if plaintiff s well-pleaded facts do not possess enough heft to show that plaintiff is entitled to relief. Ruiz Rivera v. Pfizer Pharm., LLC, 521 F.3d 76, 84 (1st Cir. 2008 (quotations and original alterations omitted. 3

Case 1:13-cv-13122-FDS Document 12 Filed 04/14/14 Page 4 of 6 III. Analysis To establish a defamation claim under Massachusetts law, a plaintiff must show (1 that the defendant made a statement concerning the plaintiff to a third party; (2 that the statement could damage the plaintiff s reputation in the community; (3 that the defendant was at fault in making the statement; and (4 that the statement either caused the plaintiff economic loss or is actionable without proof of economic loss. Shay v. Walters, 702 F.3d 76, 81 (1st Cir. 2012 (citing Ravnikar v. Bagojavlensky, 438 Mass. 627, 629-30 (2003. Defendant contends that her tweet is an expression of opinion and hyperbole. Under the First Amendment, opinions are constitutionally protected and cannot form the basis of a defamation claim. See Gertz v. Welch, 418 U.S. 323, 339-40 (1974. An expression of opinion based on disclosed or assumed nondefamatory facts is not itself sufficient for an action of defamation, no matter how unjustified or unreasonable the opinion may be or how derogatory it is. Yohe v. Nugent, 321 F.3d 35, 41 (1st Cir. 2003 (quoting Dulgarian v. Stone, 420 Mass. 843, 847 (1995. In addition, [s]tatements that contain imaginative expression or rhetorical hyperbole are protected. Levinesque v. Doocy, 560 F.3d 82, 89 (1st Cir. 2009. To determine whether or not a statement is opinion or hyperbole, a court must examine the statement in its totality and in the context in which it was uttered or published. The court must [also] consider all the words used... [and] all of the circumstances surrounding the statement. Yohe, 321 F.3d at 41 (internal quotations omitted. For example, the Supreme Court has repeatedly extended First Amendment protection to statements that, in context, do not reasonably state or imply defamatory falsehoods. See, e.g., Greenbelt Co-op. Pub. Ass n v. Bresler, 398 U.S. 6, 14 (1970 (use of the word blackmail to describe the plaintiff s hard- 4

Case 1:13-cv-13122-FDS Document 12 Filed 04/14/14 Page 5 of 6 nosed negotiating tactics could not reasonably be understood to mean the plaintiff had committed a criminal offense; Old Dominion Branch No. 496, Nat. Ass n of Letter Carriers, AFL-CIO v. Austin, 418 U.S. 264, 285-86 (1974 (union publication accusing a scab of being a traitor, accompanied by a list of names, could not reasonably be understood to accuse the listed individuals of treason; Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell, 485 U.S. 46, 50 (1988 (advertising parody depicting the Reverend Jerry Falwell in an incestuous relationship with his mother could not reasonably have been interpreted as stating actual facts about Falwell. Plaintiff contends that defendant s allegedly defamatory tweet, standing alone, is an unexplained indictment of Mara Feld s sanity. (Pl. Mem. at 2. The complaint, however, alleges that defendant posted her tweet as part of an ongoing online discussion and debate concerning the disappearance of Munition. (Compl. 5. The tweet cannot be read in isolation, but in the context of the entire discussion. In this case, the tweet was made as part of a heated Internet debate about plaintiff s responsibility for the disappearance of her horse. Furthermore, it cannot be read literally without regard to the way in which a reasonable person would interpret it. The phrase Mara Feld... is fucking crazy, when viewed in that context, cannot reasonably be understood to state actual facts about plaintiff s mental state. It was obviously intended as criticism that is, as opinion not as a statement of fact. The complaint therefore cannot base a claim of defamation on that statement. The complaint bases its claim of defamation solely on defendant s tweet. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss will be granted. 5

Case 1:13-cv-13122-FDS Document 12 Filed 04/14/14 Page 6 of 6 VI. Conclusion So Ordered. For the foregoing reasons, defendant s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Dated: April 14, 2014 /s/ F. Dennis Saylor F. Dennis Saylor IV United States District Judge 6