this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2025
66 points (98.5% liked)

Legal News

425 readers
73 users here now

International and local legal news.


Basic rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Sensitive topics need NSFW flagSome cases involve sensitive topics. Use common sense and if you think that the content might trigger someone, post it under NSFW flag.
3. Instance rules applyAll lemmy.zip instance rules listed in the sidebar will be enforced.


Icon attribution | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SanctimoniousApe 13 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

After all the advances we have made as a species, why haven't we found a way to rid ourselves of scummy people like this? There's just SO MANY of them, and they ruin EVERYTHING!

[–] MrTolkinghoen@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah fuck this guy.

[–] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 months ago
[–] Typotyper@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)
[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 1 points 3 months ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN8bJb8biZU

Not everyone likes John Oliver. But for the people who do, the end of this segment contains one of the best John Oliver payoffs of all time.

[–] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com -5 points 3 months ago

think about how you asked this when you have the internet at your fingertips….
google it

[–] adhocfungus@midwest.social 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Maybe I missed it, but were there any consequences for filing the SLAPP? The suit was tossed, which is a good start, but then what? The article made it sound like California has anti-SLAPP laws, but were they applied here?

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah. They said it's now righted the wrong, but I don't think so.

Usually, the anti-SLAPP statute specifies that the SLAPPing party needs to pay the defendant's legal fees, but in this case they were represented pro bono by a high-profile attorney, so maybe that's the only remedy and it just didn't apply.