The Need For Anti-SLAPP Laws: Developer Sues Author, Publisher, Academic Who Praised Book & Reporter That Reviewed Book
from the lawsuit-bender dept
We’ve been discussing the need for a federal anti-SLAPP law for a while, to protect people against frivolous lawsuits designed solely to get people not to speak up. Citizen Media Law Group is alerting us to a case in Texas that is calling more attention to the issue, and getting lawmakers much more interested in at least improving anti-SLAPP laws in Texas. It involves a book about a real estate project by Dallas developer H. Walker Royall, which Royall apparently did not appreciate:
When Dallas developer H. Walker Royall found out about an impending book digging into one of his projects, he went on a lawsuit bender.
He sued the author, Carla Main, and her publisher, Encounter Books. He sued Richard Epstein — the prominent libertarian academic — for a blurb he wrote praising the book. He sued Mark Lardas, who reviewed the book, and the Galveston County Daily News for publishing the review.
Uh, yeah. As someone who has blurbed a couple of books, that seems ridiculous. Suing the person who writes a blurb for the book, or a review of the book, claiming that they’re somehow responsible? Blatantly ridiculous. The article notes that Epstein was dropped from the case for jurisdiction reasons, and Lardas and the newspaper “settled” with Royall (which seems like a bad precedent as well). However, the lawsuit against the author and the publisher is still going on, and it’s drawing more attention to the need for anti-SLAPP laws.
Filed Under: anti-slapp, carla main, free speech, h. walker royall, slapp, texas
Comments on “The Need For Anti-SLAPP Laws: Developer Sues Author, Publisher, Academic Who Praised Book & Reporter That Reviewed Book”
The Rich use law as a bludgeon.
Too bad the libertarian is out of it. I’ll hope that it changed his notions about allowing some to get filthy rich now he’s found out power can be used for evil even in *private* hands.
Re: The Rich use law as a bludgeon.
Absolutely. Nobody should ever have any significant power except the state, because they’ve a long track record of never abusing or being corrupted by it. Oh, wait…
Re: Re: The Rich use law as a bludgeon.
Look, a bicycle!
any source of authority too large or powerful to be overthrown by an angry mob over the weekend is untrustworthy.
those that are not are less ‘trustworthy’ and more ‘easily replaced’
modern ‘democracy’s main job is to make it impossible for that to happen. It has nothing to do with representation and Everything to do with stability.
Somebody once said, “he who would trade freedom for safety deserves neither.”
I’m sure in was nobody important. Camp counselor or something.
I think there is no need to anti-SLAPP legislation if there was no law about defamation.
In most states of the Union you can be slapped by the law by calling others a “retard”.
Defamation per se.
Allegations or imputations “of loathsome disease” (historically leprosy and sexually transmitted disease, now also including mental illness)
How can we reduce the law footprint in our life’s?
That is the question I most want answered, I feel the law is an enabler of bad behavior, a threat to society and freedom.
Individually sue H. Walker Royall for violating their First Admendment Rights. A sum of one billion dollars each should do it.
Ahh, those bastions of freedom, newspapers …
The first to fold in what would probably be considered a first amendment case. Wow, I hope we can find a way to save all these pieces of $&#@.