UPDATE: Sherrod Defamation Claim Moves Forward

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)Shirley Sherrod, former U.S. Dept. of Agriculture director for rural development, is getting closer to having her day in court.

The United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit denied the plaintiff's motion to affirm the trial judge's denial of a motion to dismiss Sherrod's defamation suit against the late conservative blogger/journalist Andrew Breitbart, according to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press Web site (www.rcfp.org). The appellate court referred defendants' motion to dismiss to the merits panel assigned to the case. A year ago, United States District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Richard J. Leon, in Sherrod v. Breitbart et al. (Case No. 00015711), said defendants Breitbart, Lawrence O'Connor and their BigGovernment.com Web site could not rely on the District of Columbia's anti-SLAPP law ("Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation") [D.C. Law 18-0351]. (See "TUOL" post 8/1/11.)

Sherrod claims she was defamed by a YouTube video of a speech she delivered that she alleges was unfairly edited by the defendants to portray her as a racist. Her attorneys argue that the D.C. anti-SLAPP measure is inapplicable in federal court. The Court of Appeals ruling said the merits of the parties' opposing positions are not dispositive and do not warrant dismissal of the suit at the present juncture of the case.

The appellate court also refused to consolidate Sherrod's action with another defamation suit before the court that involves an anti-SLAPP defense.

UPDATE: Court Denies Breitbart Motion to Toss Sherrod Defamation Suit

Image by Getty Images via @daylifeU.S. District Court Judge for the District of Columbia Richard J. Leon last week issued orders denying motions to dismiss or alternatively, relocate Shirley Sherrod's defamation suit against Andrew Breitbart and Larry O'Connor, Legal Times reported.

Sherrod, the one-time U.S. Department of Agriculture director for rural development, in her complaint, Sherrod v. Breitbart et al. (Case No. 00015711), alleges she was defamed by conservative blogmeister Brietbart, his associate O'Connor and another whom she accused of "deceptively edit[ing]" a video clip of a speech she delivered in March 2010, that made her appear racist and discriminating against white farmers. (See "TUOL" post 4/20/11).

Though he did not issue a written opinion, Judge Leon denied the defendants' motion to relocate the suit to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California where they reside and work. Judge Leon also refused to dismiss the defamation suit based on the defendants' argument that it violated their First Amendment right to free speech. The defendants unsuccessfully invoked the anti-SLAPP law recently enacted by the District of Columbia on March 31[D.C. Law 18-0351] that allows for dismissal of a lawsuit and a stay of discovery in cases in which parties contend they are being sued over protected speech.

The parties argued the motions before Judge Leon on July 19, according to the Legal Times article.

Breitbart Seeks Dismissal or Venue Change in Sherrod Libel Suit

Image via WikipediaConservative commentator and blogger Andrew Breitbart and co-defendant Larry O'Connor argued this week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that former U.S. Dept. of Agriculture head Shirley Sherrod's defamation suit against them should be tossed on First Amendment grounds.

In her 42-page complaint, Sherrod v. Breibart et al. (Case No. 00015711), the plaintiff claims she was defamed by being portrayed as racist based on a "deceptively edited" clip of speech "taken out of context" that suggests the black Sherrod discriminated against white farmers. The defendants counter that their interpretation of the clip is protected speech under the First Amendment and that the snippet at issue and Breitbart's commentary on his Web site "captured the gist of the [Sherrod] speech."

Failing dismissal of the suit, the defendants further argued that the matter, which they already removed to federal court from D.C. Superior Court, should be transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California where they reside.