UPDATE: MN Appeals Court Tosses $60K Verdict Against Blogger

Hennepin County (Photo credit: Wikipedia)In its 14-page decision this week in Jerry L. Moore v. John Hoff a/k/a Johnny Northside (Case No. A11-1923), the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a trial judge's denial of a blogger's motion for judgment as a matter of law ("JMOL"), and overturned a $60,000 jury verdict on a tortious interference with contract claim on First Amendment grounds.

As previously reported here (see "TUOL" post 3/15/11), following a three-day trial in March 2010, a seven-member Hennepin County Jury awarded Moore, one-time director of the Jordan Area Community Council, $35,000 in lost wages and $25,000 emotional distress damages after the University of Minnesota terminated him from its Urban Research & Outreach/Engagement Center. Although Moore's defamation claims against Hoff based on the latter's June 2009, posts in his community development blog, The Adventures of Johnny Northside, went nowhere, the jury blamed Hoff's published remarks for Moore's dismissal.

Hennepin County District Court Judge Denise Reilly denied Hoff's  JMOL motion. At issue on appeal was whether a nondefamatory statement could underlie a tortious interference with contract claim and whether sufficient evidence existed to support the jury's tortious interference verdict without infringing on Hoff's First Amendment-protected blog posting.

Proving a tortious interference with contract claim requires the existence of a contract about which the alleged tortfeasor knows and intentionally, without justification, procures its breach, causing damages to the plaintiff. In a decision written by Judge Jill Flascamp Halbrooks, the Appeals Court ruled that a party cannot be held liable for tortious interference of contract for imparting truthful information to a third party.

"Because a tortious interference claim cannot be based upon true information and because the record does not contain sufficient evidence of conduct separate and distinct from Hoff's constitutionally protected speech to sustain the verdict," Judge Halbrooks wrote, "we conclude that the district court erred by denying Hoff's motion for JMOL. We therefore reverse and remand for the district court to enter judgment for Hoff."

Minn. Blogger 'Johnny Northside' on Wrong Side of Jury Verdict

Image via Wikipedia"Truth is a defense to libel" is a legal truism that may no longer embolden citizen journalist bloggers who last week saw a seven-member Hennepin County (Minn.) Civil Court jury sock John Hoff of The Adventures of Johnny Northside blog with a $60,000 judgment.

In the Fourth Judicial District of Minnesota case, Jerry Moore v. Don Allen & John Hoff (Case No. 27-cv-09-17778), the plaintiff was awarded damages of $35,000 for lost wages and $25,000 for emotional distress in his tortious interference with contract claim, according to an article in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. Moore, the former director of the Jordan Area Community Council, sued Hoff in June 2009, blaming the blogger for his termination by the University of Minnesota, where Moore was hired to study mortgage foreclosure economics by the university's Urban Research & Outreach/Engagement Center. Don Allen was dropped from the case as a defendant after he and Moore reached a settlement and later testified at trial against Hoff.

Moore alleged Hoff,  blogging as his alter ego Johnny Northside, created a "defamation zone" through five posts, one of which alleged Moore was involved in a "high-profile fraudulent mortgage" out of which former realtor Larry Maxwell was convicted and sentenced to a 16-year prison term.  Moore was not a defendant in the Maxwell case. Moore was fired the day after a Hoff blog post about him appeared.

District Judge Denise D. Reilly tossed four of the five purportedly libelous posts as not being susceptible to a defamatory meaning, but rather, constituting Hoff's opinion. The jury, however, found that Hoff interfered with Moore's employment relationship with UM that resulted in Moore's ouster. Hoff allegedly took credit for Moore's dismissal in a subsequent post.

Hoff, who alleged his post was truthful and that he had the documentation to back his linking of the plaintiff to the mortgage debacle, is expected to appeal the verdict. Some media law experts and court watchers fret that the verdict against Hoff could have a chilling effect on citizen journalism and believe the decision will be overturned on First Amendment grounds, while others cite appellate courts' deference toward jury verdicts.

UPDATE: 'Anticipation' Over: Carly Simon Loses to Starbucks in Court Again

Cover of This Kind of Love (Dig)In her amended complaint filed last June in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of the Western Division of California, 64-year-old songstress Carly Simon accused coffee colossus Starbucks of tortious interference with contract, fraudulent business practices and concealment of material facts based on what she alleged was Hear Music, Inc.'s failure to promote her album, This Kind of Love. [See "TUOL" post 6/1/10.]

As reported by Web site THR, Esq., last week U.S. District Court Judge George Wu sided with the defendant in Carly E. Simon v. Starbucks Corporation (case No. cv09-09074), dismissing the amended complaint and holding that the java giant had no legal obligation to Simon, despite representations she claimed were made to her by Starbucks content development vice-president Alan Mintz. Starbucks had ended its foray into the music business and its relationship with record distributor Hear Music.

In denying Simon Vengeance by ruling for Starbucks, Judge Wu determined it was The Right Thing to Do. Starbucks prevails and Simon gets beans.