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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Does he REALLY want to open himself up to legal discovery proceedings?? (Original Post) kpete Oct 2016 OP
Fear of discovery is why Trump did not sue the NYT on the tax return article Gothmog Oct 2016 #1
Maybe/maybe not. elleng Oct 2016 #2
Sounds like Hillary could bring a suit against Donald by those standards ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #3
Clinton like Trump is a public figure. former9thward Oct 2016 #4
They can be Sgent Oct 2016 #6
That was the standard for public figures, from the prior comment: ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #8
Please point to a lawsuit against a public figure that former9thward Oct 2016 #11
Could, not should. I didn't mean she ought to sue him really. Only that the definition applied. ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #12
but since you ask, here is a link to a write-up about six successful lawsuits ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #13
Your link has a paywall. former9thward Oct 2016 #16
Sorry, guess I must be blocking it or have a different browser or settings. No block when I clicked. ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #17
They should immediately avebury Oct 2016 #5
Exactly. I think he's using the court to try and legitimatize his defense. He wants people to know okaawhatever Oct 2016 #9
+1 on that, NYT should go full speed ahead and call for discovery on everything they can now ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #15
I bet tRump is hoping they will settle out of court... Javaman Oct 2016 #7
Between Trump U and the rape case... Wounded Bear Oct 2016 #10
He does have a history of filing lawsuits - thousands apparently? nineteen hundred, sorry. ColemanMaskell Oct 2016 #14

elleng

(130,974 posts)
2. Maybe/maybe not.
Wed Oct 12, 2016, 10:55 PM
Oct 2016

Allegations difficult to 'prove,' and standard for defamation of a 'public person' also challenging:

Defamation of a Public Person
There are some people who are in the public spotlight, who must endure the opinions and publications of the public, largely without recourse. Statements made about people such as government officials, political candidates, celebrities, sports players, and authors, are usually exempt from claims defamation, whether the claims are libelous or slanderous. This is true even if the statements, or pictures, are untrue and damaging. If, however, untrue statements are made about such a public person with malice, or with hate and a desire to cause harm with no regard for the truth, the public person may have a right to bring a civil lawsuit.

http://legaldictionary.net/libel/

ColemanMaskell

(783 posts)
3. Sounds like Hillary could bring a suit against Donald by those standards
Thu Oct 13, 2016, 03:44 AM
Oct 2016

"hate and a desire to cause harm with no regard for the truth"? That fits Trump's very public statements about HRC.

former9thward

(32,025 posts)
4. Clinton like Trump is a public figure.
Thu Oct 13, 2016, 03:55 AM
Oct 2016

In US courts public figures can't be sued successfully for defamation.

Sgent

(5,857 posts)
6. They can be
Thu Oct 13, 2016, 06:13 AM
Oct 2016

but you have to prove intentional disregard for the truth and malice. Its a very high bar to meet.

ColemanMaskell

(783 posts)
8. That was the standard for public figures, from the prior comment:
Sat Oct 15, 2016, 10:33 PM
Oct 2016

it said: "If, however, untrue statements are made about such a public person with malice, or with hate and a desire to cause harm with no regard for the truth, the public person may have a right to bring a civil lawsuit. "

former9thward

(32,025 posts)
11. Please point to a lawsuit against a public figure that
Sun Oct 16, 2016, 01:40 AM
Oct 2016

has been successful based on those facts. I won't hold my breath.

former9thward

(32,025 posts)
16. Your link has a paywall.
Sun Oct 16, 2016, 04:28 PM
Oct 2016

So I have no idea if those cases are even close to what you said Clinton could sue.

ColemanMaskell

(783 posts)
17. Sorry, guess I must be blocking it or have a different browser or settings. No block when I clicked.
Mon Oct 17, 2016, 01:37 AM
Oct 2016

It's just a write-up on a few celebrities who have successfully sued.

There's a mathematical point here: Given the enormous number of public figures we have, and the enormous popularity of attacking them, and the enormous number of crazies in America, there are obviously going to be a truly tremendous number of libelous statements against celebrities; combine that with the fact that targets of libel don't like being publicly libeled, and that typically celebrities have lots of money for lawyers, it follows obviously that a large number of libel lawsuits must be filed regarding libels against celebrities. Even if winning one is as unlikely as being struck by lightning, mathematically there will still be a few cases where such a lawsuit is successful. The fact that the article only turned up six such cases (though perhaps on scant research) demonstrates that the event is unlikely, which is another way of saying that it is very difficult for a celebrity to win such a case. My point was simply that there is a difference between very difficult and impossible.

It may seem both a lame and an obvious point to bother making, but you did ask. A moment's sober reflection on the numbers should bring you to realize that some few people are indeed struck by lightning and some occasional libel lawsuit involving a public figure must prevail, albeit rarely.

You asked for 1. Here is a case involving Jesse Ventura winning such a lawsuit.

http://jux.law/defamation-of-a-public-figure/

Excerpt:

Former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura recently made news headlines when he won a defamation lawsuit against a book author, Chris Kyle. A jury decided that Kyle defamed Ventura in his book. In the book, American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History, Kyle told of a time he met Ventura in a bar, heard Ventura make anti-military remarks, and punched Ventura. The jury decided this printed story was defamation, also known as libel when written or slander when spoken.

The Ventura v. Kyle case is noteworthy because public figures rarely sue for defamation and win. This case could encourage other public figures to sue people who publicly defame them.

avebury

(10,952 posts)
5. They should immediately
Thu Oct 13, 2016, 04:58 AM
Oct 2016

have him served with a subpoena for a deposition and publicly announce they are ready to move forward immediately with discovery and go after The Apprentice videos.

okaawhatever

(9,462 posts)
9. Exactly. I think he's using the court to try and legitimatize his defense. He wants people to know
Sat Oct 15, 2016, 10:37 PM
Oct 2016

he's suing, that the articles are bogus, no one will care if the lawsuit goes through after Nov. 8th.

ColemanMaskell

(783 posts)
15. +1 on that, NYT should go full speed ahead and call for discovery on everything they can now
Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:40 PM
Oct 2016

It's not just a matter of civic responsibility -- think of how many stories NYT can get out of this! Ratings bonanza. Has to happen now while it's still topical / relevant / trending.

Javaman

(62,530 posts)
7. I bet tRump is hoping they will settle out of court...
Thu Oct 13, 2016, 09:59 AM
Oct 2016

boy, will tRump be surprised.

Never piss off the press, even he corporate press, they know where all the bodies are buried.

Wounded Bear

(58,670 posts)
10. Between Trump U and the rape case...
Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:05 AM
Oct 2016

I think he'll be doing a lot of discovery.

If he really does try to sue the NYT....well, good luck with that. Probably get laughed out of court. Doubt this even gets to discovery. It's a PR stunt.

ColemanMaskell

(783 posts)
14. He does have a history of filing lawsuits - thousands apparently? nineteen hundred, sorry.
Sun Oct 16, 2016, 12:35 PM
Oct 2016

The total they give -- of 3,500 lawsuits -- includes both lawsuits by Trump and those against Trump.
Closer reading indicates "1,900 where he or his companies were a plaintiff "

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/01/donald-trump-lawsuits-legal-battles/84995854/

Addendum: Closer reading shows that the bulk of the lawsuits he filed were to collect on gambling debts. He sued people who had lost money at his casino(s) while using a line of credit from the casino, and who had then stiffed the casino on the credit line.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Does he REALLY want to op...