
• Iowa judge says a sheriff denied the applications of a father and son for concealed weapons permits in retaliation for their political activism. "This is a great reminder that the First Amendment protects the sole individual who may be a gadfly, kook, weirdo, nut job, whacko, and spook, with the same force of protection as folks with more majoritarian and popular views." Dorr v. Weber
• 5th Circuit rules that a school district violated the religious freedom of a Native American boy by requiring him to wear his long hair in a bun on top of his head or in a braid tucked into his shirt. The boy "has a sincere religious belief in wearing his hair uncut and in plain view." A.A. v. Needville Ind. Sch. Dist.
• 11th Circuit denies a challenge to an ordinance restricting handouts of food to the homeless in Orlando parks. "[W]e are unpersuaded that the conduct of simply feeding people ... is expressive for First Amendment purposes." First Vagabonds Church v. City of Orlando
• Boston judge slashes a jury award in an illegal music downloading case from $675,000 to $67,500. "The award in this case ... lacks any rational foundation and smacks of arbitrariness." Sony v. Tenenbaum
• Iowa Supreme Court suspends a voyeuristic attorney indefinitely for peeping on women through windows. "[W]e cannot overlook the serious, egregious, and persistent nature of [Mark] Templeton’s misconduct and the effect it had on his victims." Disciplinary Board v. Templeton
• Pennsylvania judge strikes down the state's blasphemy law in a case brought by a film producer who wanted to name his company "I Choose Hell Productions." "'Choosing hell' may be an irreverent choice for a corporate name, but under the Constitution, this fact alone cannot be the basis for its suppression from the public debate." Kalman v. Cortes
• Cancer patient sues Wal-Mart for firing him after discovering that he uses medical marijuana for pain relief. "[N]o corporation doing business in Michigan should be permitted to flout state laws protecting patients who use medical marihuana in accordance with state law." Casias v. Wal-Mart Stores
• 11th Circuit rules that the operator of an Internet porn dorm was engaged in illegally operating a business in a residential zone. "Business objectives are the sole reason individuals are paid to live and engage in sexual activities at the 27th Street residence." Flava Works v. City of Miami

|
|
Landlord-Tenant Battle Takes Novel Tweet Libel Twist |
|
|
A first-of-its-kind defamation lawsuit over a Chicago apartment renter's 16-word Twitter post appears to be the poisonous fruit of a tenant-friendly housing ordinance that landlords say punishes them unfairly for petty violations.
Horizon Realty Group, which manages 15 buildings in Chicago, reacted to the run-of-the-mill tenant gripe of Amanda Bonnen by suing her last week for libel damages of at least $50,000. Bonnen wrote in a now-infamous May 12 Twitter post:
Who said sleeping in a moldy apartment was bad for you? Horizon realty thinks it's okay.
It is believed to be the first libel suit involving a single tweet –- a case filed against rock singer Courtney Love in May alleged she defamed a fashion designer in 10 Twitter postings. Tweets cannot exceed 140 characters.
According to Horizon, no mold was ever found in Bonnen's apartment in the Buena Terrace building and she moved out “on her own volition” on June 30. “The statements in the Tweet concerning Plaintiff were and are wholly false,” Horizon says in its complaint. “By reason of the publication of them, Plaintiff has been greatly injured in its reputation as a landlord in Chicago.”
The nationwide publicity over the suit has turned Horizon into a symbol of landlord villainy. Bonnen's Twitter page only had 22 followers, making it implausible to say the least that Horizon could have suffered a great injury.
“[T]his company is digging themselves into the worst PR nightmare on earth!” one Chicago Tribune reader exclaimed.
But Bonnen actually struck the first blow in the legal battle, filing a housing law class action against Horizon on June 24 that takes advantage of the tenant-friendly provisions of the Chicago Residential and Landlord Tenant Ordinance (CRLTO).
The complaint alleges two claims –- that Horizon violated the ordinance by failing to pay interest on Bonnen's $250 security deposit and by failing to include “mandatory porch safety language” in her rental agreement. The porch safety provision was added to the law after a porch attached to the rear of a Chicago apartment building collapsed in 2003, killing 13 people.
“The city wanted to spread the word to tenants: Don't overload your porch,” explains Chicago renters' attorney Mark Silverman, an expert on the CRLTO.
A violation of the porch safety provision carries an automatic $100 fine and Bonnen is also eligible for statutory damages of twice the value of her security deposit plus interest. Since Horizon has more than 1,500 tenants, it could be facing a class action liability of more than $500,000.
In a statement, Horizon spokesman Jeffrey Michael said Bonnen's suit “is completely baseless and was waged merely as a pretext to address an underlying disagreement” over water damage to her apartment. “This is a classic example of tenants trying to manipulate the controversial RLTO for their benefit,” he added.
Renters' attorneys in Chicago have become expert in scouring leases for violations, however inconsequential they may seem. But Silverman insists Bonnen didn't do anything manipulative in filing a CRLTO suit rather than pursuing what would have been a far more complicated mold case against Horizon.
“It makes a lot more sense to sue them for strict liability [CRLTO] violations that come with automatic penalties,” he tells On Point.
In a major victory for tenants, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Regent Realty Group, 754 N.E.2d 334 (2001), that a landlord's violation of the CRLTO need not be willful for a tenant to recover damages. A dissenting justice said he did not believe that “the Chicago city council intended to punish landlords for inadvertent mistakes and violations of the Ordinance.”
Horizon's libel suit against Bonnen, meanwhile, looks more pretextual than substantive. “I think they're trying to use [it] to scare her out of her case,” Silverman says.
But the publicity storm has probably cost Horizon any leverage it might have had. Michael didn't do his cause any good by telling a Chicago Sun-Times reporter, "We're a 'sue first, ask questions later' kind of an organization."
Horizon could also face an award of attorney fees under Illinois' anti-SLAPP law for filing a suit in retaliation for Bonnen's exercise of her free-speech rights.
By Matthew Heller 7/30/09
|
|
-
Sex Harassment Claims Hit Actor Affleck, 'Bones' Star
A producer of a film about actor Joaquin Phoenix, an extra on the set of the TV show “Bones,” an assistant property master, and a makeup artist are among the plaintiffs in a recent epidemic of lurid Hollywood lawsuits.
Read more...
-
Jury Goes 'Wild' in Woman's Privacy Case Over Video
A Missouri jury has gone wild in a case of involuntary nudity, finding that a woman consented to appearing topless in a “Girls Gone Wild” video by playing to the camera before another person pulled her top down.
Read more...
-
Actress Facing $750K Award to Therapist
Soap opera star Hunter Tylo may have to pay more than $750,000 in damages and attorney fees to a psychotherapist whom she sued more than four years ago for negligent treatment of her children, On Point has learned.
Read more...
-
Reporter Sues Hotels Over Peephole Videos
In an unusual premises liability case, ESPN reporter Erin Andrews has sued the operators of three hotels for allowing a stalker to surreptitiously videotape her naked through peepholes in the doors to her rooms.
Read more...
-
Students Challenge Rubber Fetus Ban
The suspensions of seven pro-life students at two Roswell, N.M., high schools for distributing rubber fetuses have given birth to a lawsuit that takes the First Amendment protections for student speech into uncharted territory.
Read more...
-
Distress Claim Barred in Hotel 'Ménâge à Trois' Case
A former employee of a luxury Miami Beach hotel who says her billionaire boss invited her to join him in a “ménâge à trois” cannot sue him for infliction of emotional distress, a judge has ruled, finding his alleged behavior, while “obnoxious,” was not “objectively outrageous.”
Read more...
-
Chuck E. Cheese Settles Molesting Mascot Suit
A Missouri woman who claimed a Chuck E. Cheese mascot groped her breast has settled her lawsuit against the operator of the restaurant chain, On Point has learned.
Read more...
|
Stovell v. James Subject: LeBron's paternity Document: Complaint
U.S. v. Arizona Subject: Illegal immigration Document: Complaint
Rosenberg v. Google Subject: Negligent navigation Document: Complaint
Smith v. Hooters Subject: Weight discrimination Document: Complaint
City of Ontario v. Quon Subject: Text-message privacy Document: Opinion
more
|
|
Rosenberg v. Musical Arts Assn. Court: Cuyahoga County (Ohio) Common Pleas Subject: Defamation, age bias
Mecozzi v. City of Los Angeles Court: L.A. Superior Subject: Police brutality Verdict: $1.7 million
more
|
|
Jose Padilla v. John Yoo Date: 6/14/10 Court: 9th Circuit Hearing: Oral arguments in human rights case.
Perry v. Schwarzenegger Date: 6/16/10 Court: USDC, N. Calif. Hearing: Closing arguments in trial of challenge to gay marriage ban.
more
|
|
|