08 Feb

The Case for Anti-SLAPP Legislation

SLAPPFreedom of speech reigns in the United States. Unless you are criticizing a person or company with the funds to sue you into infinity. Then you could find yourself on the receiving end of an expensive lawsuit that has no aim other than to shut you up. (Case study: Medifast Inc.’s $270 million lawsuit against me and others; I have won and Medifast is now trying to get out of paying the $300k+ of legal fees they are required to pay.)

Attorney Eric Turkewitz writes about his experience with SLAPP suits in New York. (SLAPP = Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) Although the law protects people who write truthful things and/or state their opinions, the legal process of getting a case dismissed is onerous without anti-SLAPP laws. (Even with anti-SLAPP laws, it can still be expensive. Medifast sued in California, where there is good anti-SLAPP legislation, but it still took over $300k in attorneys fees — not counting the hundreds of thousands of dollars the other defendants spent on their attorneys — and over four years of litigation to get the suit against me dismissed.) Read More

20 Jun

Brilliant Commentary on Lawyers and the Exercise of Free Speech as it Relates to the Rakofsky Fiasco

Joseph Rakofsky is still pursuing his lawsuit against the Internet. As expected, things are not going well for him in this matter. But he wants to continue nonetheless. His lawyer is withdrawing from the case. Rakofsky is not licensed to practice law in New York, where he filed his lawsuit. So while he can represent himself pro se, Rakofsky cannot represent his corporation, which is a party to the suit.

While responding to the nonsense of Rakofsky and his almost former attorney Richard Borzouye, Eric Turkewitz writes this brilliant commentary on why he and other defendants (mostly lawyer bloggers) think it’s important to write about clowns like Rakofsky: Read More

03 Jun

What the Judge Really Said About Joseph Rakofsky and His Incompetence

The internets are all abuzz with the story of Joseph Rakofsky, young attorney with almost no experience, prone to inflating his credentials on his (now removed) web page, who is suing a large portion of the internets in what has been dubbed Rakofsky v Internet.

It all started when the Washington Post reported that the judge in a murder trial booted Joe Rakofsky as counsel for the defendant because he was so inept.  The story said Rakofsky’s incompetence was reason enough to grant a mistrial. The story was told over and over again by bloggers, and soon Joey was suing them all! Read More

22 May

Rakofsky Suing the Internet: Career Suicide

If there is any quicker way to bring negative attention to negative news, I don’t know of it. Joseph Rakofsky seems to have a lock on ruining his own career by “suing the internet.”

It all started with Rakofsky, a new-ish lawyer who was representing Dontrell Deaner in a murder case in Washington, D.C.  The Washington Post reported in its article D.C. Superior Court Judge Declares Mistrial Over Attorney’s Competence in Murder Case: Read More