A review is getting them sued

Thoughts

[bwnbwn]

This family is getting sued for a negative reviews of a chrch. Doesn't matter it is a church the thought is a lawyer took the case and filed the lawsuit.

[foxnews.com...]

Now I would have to shell out to retain an attorney just because I wrote a review created a blog, and posted in Google that contained a few words they say are defamation.

Granted it looks like the woman took it to the 10th of a degree creating a blog to continue her ranting but is there grounds for a lawsuit? Thoughts?

[Marshall]

Remember, you can sue for anything, but whether you win or not is another question.

Marshall

[aspdaddy]

I would think the right to reputation in this case is legally stronger than the right to free speech, based on the words used.

[Marshall]

I would think the right to reputation in this case is legally stronger than the right to free speech

Not necessarily. You have to prove that you were somehow harmed by the comments, which usually means some financial loss. And from my brief read of the story, it seems the comments are made at the church in general, not a specific person. Personally, I think it is a no win lawsuit.

Marshall

[StoutFiles]

And from my brief read of the story, it seems the comments are made at the church in general, not a specific person.

If she said one thing that can be proved untrue, she will lose.

[Marshall]

In the story terms used were "creepy," "cult," "control tactics," and "spiritual abuse." These are rather subjective if you ask me.

Marshal

[Leosghost]

In the story terms used were "creepy," "cult," "control tactics," and "spiritual abuse." These are rather subjective if you ask me

.

IME ..Sounds like it could be descriptive of all / any religions..

Surprised they didn't accuse her of heresy, while they were drawing up the charges..

She should have said they were spreading lies and falsehoods ( re the existence of sky fairies..or at least their particular "brand" ) ..and they would have had to prove they were not..ie; prove the existence of sky fairies in general and their's in particular.. :) )

The church should be ashamed, using the laws of "man" to try to silence dissent in the 21st century...their lawyers should be ashamed for bringing the profession into disrepute for taking on the case..

It does matter that they are a church..they want the ( IMO totally unjustified tax and other "breaks" that they get )..then they should accept that others may judge them, publicly or privately..They should allow that one judge them by their deeds, not what they say about themselves , nor by what others may say about them..

Mathew 5:39 and Luke 6:29..

There ain't nothin' in the bible about "sic a lawyer on em"..

[bwnbwn]

I agree it is bad a church can't just blow off a former member. Then again some are like well no sense going there. I do feel this could draw much attention to a bigger issue were does free speech and defamation become murky water and some new attorney needing attention jumps on it.

There was this small little ole store in the town I live in sue all the ones doing PPC back in 2005 for ppc fraud and won a judgement.
[stopscum.com...]
Just never know how something will turn out if it gets in front of a jury.

She will have to hire an attorney 2500 min to help either get this knocked out or if it goes to court probably 5k or better in fees.

[lgn1]

When you say something negative, about somebody or something, you should start your sentence with "In my humble opinion"

Then it becomes an opinion, and not a statement of fact.

If everbody did this, it would put a bunch of lawyers out of business.

[rasputinsghost]

When you say something negative, about somebody or something, you should start your sentence with "In my humble opinion"

Then it becomes an opinion, and not a statement of fact.

If everbody did this, it would put a bunch of lawyers out of business.

In my humble opinion you are sooooooooooooo right ;>}

I have a small forum site and the template for displaying comments puts "The following is the opinion of *username*" and then the text - has saved me so much grief

On 2 occasions lawyers have phoned up threatening law suits for defamation.
One I flat told to go jump in the lake (I had also had a bad experience with his customer).
The other got his client to replaced the faulty merchandise and the submitter then made a post to that effect.
Turns out it was actually a clerical screwup with the date of the sale and the warrenty was in fact valid.
And now that vendor actually advertises on the site.
There is a "lemons/lemonade" story in there somewhere.

[nomis5]

When you say something negative, about somebody or something, you should start your sentence with "In my humble opinion"

Then it becomes an opinion, and not a statement of fact.

If everbody did this, it would put a bunch of lawyers out of business.

I second that absolutely. I have one review site which expresses my personal opinion after only one visit to the store being reviewed. I've been threatened many times with legal action because various owners didn't like the comments. I point out that every page has a clear section saying it's my opinion only and may be the result of one visit.

No-one has followed up my email / phone call with any further threats of legal action. Just to be sure, to be sure , to sure (I'm half Irish) I always take a photo of the area being criticised.

UK based.

[rasputinsghost]

I always take a photo of the area being criticised.

Nice - Like it! If you do not mind, I'll be using it!