A brief update about my case.
My attorneys are working on my petition for review to the California Supreme Court. They don’t accept most of these, so the odds are not great. On the other hand, there are constitutional issues involved. If the lower court anti-SLAPP verdict stands as is, I’ll owe the LA Times at least $330,000 in their legal fees, and hundreds of reporters in California will lose important protections against being discriminated against by race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.
If the high court accepts my case and rules in my favor, we move on to discovery. We’ll finally get to start preparing for me to get my day in court. We’ll subpoena documents and depose witnesses.
If they do not accept my case or rule against me, it’s over.
I’ll keep you posted.
8 Comments.
I don’t suppose there’s anyone to lobby?
“hundreds of reporters in California will lose important protections”
Yeah, too bad there isn’t anybody to write about this problem to alert the public … /snark
To be fair, media workers who survive the repeated cullings aren’t necessarily the most strident ones. People might just be afraid to be associated with a “troublemaker” in case even their bland work raises ire.
Let’s see, if only there were a type of political journalists who were to do punching-up hard-hitting satire and hence unafraid, even proud, of rocking the boat. Perhaps they could work with graphical images to fit the modern instagram approach to journalism?
Now it’s my turn to snark 😉
Best of luck, Ted – with the (in)justice system stacked against you, you are going to need it….
Henri
I finally got around to reading the actual law. I’d figured there would be some ambiguity which would force a judge to apply it even if he disagreed with it.
There ain’t no such animal. The actual law is quite clear in that it’s to protect the little guys from the big guys. There’s no way in hell it could be misapplied.
But that does raise the question: how come Ted’s side hasn’t anti-SLAPPED the Times’ SLAPP?
Apparently we can only go after the LA Times for filing a frivolous anti-SLAPP motion if and after we prevail in defeating them.
See? The system works!
(total snark, in case it wasn’t evident)
Naturally.
In maybe one of the oldest lawyer jokes, the youngest lawyer from a family of lawyers comes home beaming. The others ask him why he is grinning like the Joker. I have big news, he says. Today I finished adjudicating the Mirowsky case. His elders erupt – are you mad? Your family has lived off this case for three generations!