Superior Court of Santa Clara County

Writer, Student, and Public Speaker in California

Hire me

Defendants, former employees of plaintiff employers, appealed a defamation judgment from the Superior Court of Santa Clara County (California), which was entered on a jury verdict. The judgment granted damages and a broad injunction.

The employees posted derogatory messages about the employers on Internet bulletin boards. The messages described the employers as incompetent liars and accused them of harassment and discrimination. The court affirmed the award of damages, finding the accusations to be libelous per se under Cal. Civ. Code § 45a. The court held that defamatory posts to the Internet were properly characterized as libel under Cal. Civ. Code § 45. Because Internet messages were a form of written communication, they could not be characterized as slander under Cal. Civ. Code § 46. Hire a attorney for employment law in California

The injunction was an unconstitutional prior restraint, however, to the extent it prohibited future statements similar to the defamatory statements. Moreover, the injunction was invalid as applied to any persons not joined as parties. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 916 did not automatically stay trial pending an appeal from an order denying a Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16 motion to strike; hence, the trial court had jurisdiction to conduct the trial. The employers did not violate an order that stayed enforcement of the judgment when they advised newspapers and others that they believed certain published statements were defamatory.

The court affirmed the judgment as modified to strike the prohibition of future statements and to strike all relief granted to persons who were not parties. The court dismissed the employees' motion for adjudication of contempt.

Defendant buyer sought review of a judgment from a trial court (California), which was rendered in favor of plaintiff seller on his action to recover $ 20,000 from defendant, and to compel defendant to execute and deliver a mortgage to plaintiff for $ 40,000, which was the remainder of the purchase money for a boat.