Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 12:37 AM Apr 2013

Company Files Defamation Suit Against Customer For Complaining

[font size=3]Med Express Sues Marginally Dissatisfied Customer For Posting Accurate Feedback On eBay[/font]

TechDirt
by Mike Masnick
Tue, Apr 16th 2013 3:12pm


Here's yet another example of companies using lawsuits to censor speech -- a situation that would be stopped if there was a serious federal anti-SLAPP law in place. Paul Levy shares the incredible story of a company called "Med Express," an Ohio company, who appears to sell various medical equipment exclusively via eBay (there are other "Med Express" companies out there from what I can tell). One buyer, in South Carolina, purchased something, but was disappointed by the fact that the product arrived postage due. The woman noted it wasn't the fact that she had to pay, just the inconvenience of having to pay to get the delivery when it wasn't expected. In response, she left negative feedback on Med Express' eBay page.

While Med Express did express regret (while noting that some other customers had seen the same problem) and offered to reimburse the postage due, it also asked her to remove the negative review. However, as she noted, it wasn't the money issue, but the inconvenience, so she decided to leave her feedback up. At this point, Med Express and its lawyer, James Amodio, apparently decided that if she didn't like "inconvenience" it would subject her to more inconvenience and sued her for defamation in state court in Ohio and sought a temporary restraining order against eBay to block the review. While that failed, apparently the judge is allowing a hearing to happen for a preliminary injunction even though (as Levy points out) the same reason the TRO was rejected should apply to any preliminary injunction.

Amazingly, the complaint directly lays out the pretty clear fact that it's suing her for not removing a truthful review. They don't even attempt to argue that she said anything false or defamatory. Just that they feel she shouldn't have complained since they offered to reimburse.

This is where Levy, a former colleague of the customer in this case, Amy Nicholls, reached out to Amodio to point out that the lawsuit was a complete joke. Amodio's response is somewhat stunning, in that, according to Levy, he more or less admitted that he was filing a nuisance lawsuit:
    I contacted [link:James Amodio|http://www.brownandamodio.com/james_amodio.html], Med Express’s lawyer, to explain to him the many ways in which his lawsuit is untenable. He readily admitted that, as the complaint admits, everything that the customer had posted in her feedback was true; he did not deny that a statement has to be false to be actionable as defamation; but he just plain didn’t care. To the contrary, he told me that I could come up to Medina, Ohio, and argue whatever I might like, but that the case was going to continue unless the feedback was taken down or changed to positive. And he explained why his client was insisting on this change — he said that it sells exclusively over eBay, where a sufficient level of negative feedback can increase the cost of such sales as well as possibly driving away customers

MORE


- With morons running a company like this, I suppose she should count herself lucky they didn't send someone around to break her legs and put her in a wheelchair....
18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Company Files Defamation Suit Against Customer For Complaining (Original Post) DeSwiss Apr 2013 OP
Ms Levy undoubtedly knows of several causes of action that marybourg Apr 2013 #1
I'm sure Med Express' lawyer won't mind defending them further..... DeSwiss Apr 2013 #3
I'm sure you're right. marybourg Apr 2013 #4
such bullshit it's not even funny. nt TeamPooka Apr 2013 #2
It could be..... DeSwiss Apr 2013 #5
only then will I laugh along with her. TeamPooka Apr 2013 #6
Testing the waters for ALEC mick063 Apr 2013 #7
Actually, no I don't think it's coming..... DeSwiss Apr 2013 #8
call the Ohio Bar and ask what they think of the attorney's behavior ZRT2209 Apr 2013 #9
He can't be held accountable.... DeSwiss Apr 2013 #10
In most states I'm aware of, he certainly can. Robb Apr 2013 #18
Med Express is now besmirching their own good name. bluedigger Apr 2013 #11
That would be.... DeSwiss Apr 2013 #12
Do they sell wheelchairs? Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2013 #13
Sanctionable under Rule 11 (or similar rule in Ohio) Sanity Claws Apr 2013 #14
kicking for the bad publicity to MED EXPRESS OHIO. A company that sues its customers. HiPointDem Apr 2013 #15
I hope this action bites them back! liberalla Apr 2013 #17
I would take down the feedback Renew Deal Apr 2013 #16

marybourg

(12,540 posts)
1. Ms Levy undoubtedly knows of several causes of action that
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 12:50 AM
Apr 2013

she can counter sue for, including a little thing called "abuse of process".

 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
3. I'm sure Med Express' lawyer won't mind defending them further.....
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 12:58 AM
Apr 2013

...as long as the fee payments holdout.

 

mick063

(2,424 posts)
7. Testing the waters for ALEC
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 01:12 AM
Apr 2013

Don't worry.....some model legislation is coming.

From the link.

"ALEC in Arizona" identifies seventeen bills introduced in the 2013 session that appear to reflect ALEC model legislation. These bills would defund Arizona's public school system (SB 1409 and HB 2617), eliminate collective bargaining rights (HB 2330), undermine the Affordable Care Act (HB 2588) and make it more difficult for Arizonans to sue corporations using class action lawsuits (SB 1452).



In other words, you can't sue them, but they will be able to sue you.

It's coming. You know it is coming.
 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
8. Actually, no I don't think it's coming.....
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 01:26 AM
Apr 2013

...because people are getting fed up with this SHIT.

 

DeSwiss

(27,137 posts)
10. He can't be held accountable....
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 01:33 AM
Apr 2013

...for the stupidity of his client I'm sure. Which I'm sure he'd argue if for no other reason than self-preservation.

- Of course his own stupidity is another thing. Like talking to another lawyer, saying things that could get himself sanctioned. Now that he owns.......

Robb

(39,665 posts)
18. In most states I'm aware of, he certainly can.
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 09:24 AM
Apr 2013

Rules of Conduct generally state an attorney cannot, on behalf of their client, bring action before the court that they know is frivolous, lacks merit, or is designed purely to drive up attorney's fees.

Judges can, and do, sanction lawyers.

bluedigger

(17,077 posts)
11. Med Express is now besmirching their own good name.
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 01:36 AM
Apr 2013

They will be lucky if other companies d/b/a "Med Express" don't sue them for damages.

Sanity Claws

(21,822 posts)
14. Sanctionable under Rule 11 (or similar rule in Ohio)
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 06:25 AM
Apr 2013

I don't know Ohio rules but federal rules and many state rules have Rule 11, which means that the attorney's signature to the pleading means he has conducted an investigation and that the case is well-founded in fact and law.
That case is not well-founded in law.
The first step is to write a letter to the attorney that the defendant intends to pursue Rule 11 remedies. If the attorney does not withdraw the case, then the defendant moves to have it dismissed either on Rule 12 b6 or for summary judgment under Rule 56.
Once the case is dismissed, defendant moves to obtain attorneys fees and other costs under Rule 11.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
15. kicking for the bad publicity to MED EXPRESS OHIO. A company that sues its customers.
Wed Apr 17, 2013, 06:28 AM
Apr 2013

Med Express uses broken Ohio law to silence critics who say true things: This is their page (they're all ebay sales)

http://myworld.ebay.com/med_express_sales/

Are you a lawyer in Ohio? If so, your pro-bono services are urgently needed to defeat a trollish, bullying legal action from Med Express, a company that sells refurb medical equipment on eBay.

The company is suing one of its customers for providing accurate, negative feedback on eBay's comment system, trying to establish a precedent that saying true things on the Internet should be illegal if it harms your business. They're relying on the fact that Ohio has no anti-SLAPP laws -- laws designed to protect people against the use of litigation threats to extort silence from critics -- and have admitted that, while they have no case, they believe that they can use the expense of dragging their victims into an Ohio court to win anyway.

Ken from Popehat has more:

This is the ugly truth of the legal system: litigants and lawyers can manipulate it to impose huge expense on defendants no matter what the merits of their complaint. Censors can abuse the system to make true speech so expensive and risky that citizens will be silenced. Regrettably, Ohio does not have an anti-SLAPP statute, so Med Express and James Amodio can behave in this matter with relative impunity. If Ms. Nicholls has to incur ruinous legal expenses to vindicate her rights, the bad guys win, whatever the ultimate outcome of the case.

Unless, that is, you will help Amy Nicholls stand up — not for $1.44, but for the freedom to speak the truth without being abused by a broken legal system.

If you are an attorney practicing in Medina County, Ohio, please consider offering pro bono assistance. Mr. Levy will be coordinating assistance, and I can tell you from personal experience that it is a privilege to work with him. Help give Med Express and James Amodio the legal curb-stomping they so richly deserve. Justice, karma, and the esteem of free speech supporters everywhere will be your reward.

If you aren't an attorney, you can help, too. Med Express should not be permitted to act in this manner without consequence. The natural and probable consequence is widespread publication of their conduct. Help by publicizing the case on Facebook, Twitter, on your blog, on forums, and on every other venue available to you. Ask yourself — would you want to do business with a company that abuses the legal system to extract revenge against customers who leave truthful negative feedback?

http://boingboing.net/2013/04/16/med-express-uses-broken-ohio-l.html

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Company Files Defamation ...