IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA
MATTHEW CHAN, ) Appellant, ) Docket No.: ) S14A1652 -against- ) ) Lower Court No.: LINDA ELLIS, ) SU13DM409 Appellee.
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF OF APPELLANT IN RESPONSE TO SECOND AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF OF TIMOTHY B. MCCORMACK
Respectfully Submitted, Oscar Michelen (Courtesy Admission) NY State Bar No.: 2058477 CUOMO LLC 9 East 38
th
Street New York, NY 10016 William J. McKenney GA State Bar No.: 494725 MCKENNEY & FROEHLICH 50 Polk Street NW Marietta, GA 30064
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Citations ……………………………………………………… ii I. Preliminary Statement ……………………………………………….. 1 II. Discussion of Facts …………………………………………………. 1 II. Argument and Citation of Authorities ………………….…………... 2 A.
THE
US
SUPREME
COURT
HAS
ANALYZED
CIVIL
INJUNCTIONS BETWEEN
PRIVATE
LITIGANTS
AS
PRIOR
RESTRAINTS
ON
SPEECH
……….....
2 B.
BECAUSE APPELLANT’S POSTS ARE NOT “TRUE THREATS” THEY ARE PROTECTED BY FEDERAL LAW AND WERE THE SUBJECT OF AN OVERLY BROAD RESTRICTIVE ORDER
…………………………………………… 4 C.
APPELLANT HAS NOT WAIVED HIS RIGHTS
………………………………
7 D.
THE COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT MAKES APPELLANT IMMUNE FROM LIABLITY FOR POSTS MADE BY OTHERS
……………………………… 8
E.
THAT APPELLANT CAN POSSIBLY SPEAK ABOUT APPELLEE ON OTHER OUTLETS HAS NO BEARING ON WHETHER THIS ORDER IS CONSTITUTIONAL
. . . 9 IV. Conclusion …………………………………………………………… 10
ii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Cases
Austin v. Keefe
402 U.S. 415 (1971)………………………………………….. 2
Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley v. Roomates.com
, 521 F.3d 1157 (9
th
Cir. 2008) .......................................................................................................... 9
Jones v. Dirty World Entertainment Recordings, LLC.
840 F. Supp 2d 1008 (ED Ky. 2012) ..............................................................................................................10
Madsen v. Women’s Health Center, Inc.
, 512 U.S. 753 (1994). ............................... 4
McGuire v. Reilly
, 386 F.3d 45 (1
st
Cir. 2004)( ......................................................... 4
Near v. Minnesota ex rel. Olson
, 283 U.S. 697 (1931) ............................................. 2
Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network of Western New York.
519 U.S. 357 (1997) ......... 4
Southeastern Promotions Ltd. v. Conrad
, 420 U.S. 546 (1979) ..............................10
Tory v. Cochran
, 544 U.S. 734 (2005) ...................................................................... 5
U.S. v. Alaboud
, 347 F.3d 1293 (11
th
Cir. 2003) ....................................................... 8
Statutes
Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA) ..........................................................
9
Other Authorities
1.
"Doxing"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doxing .................................................... 6 2. “
Social Shaming Works Faster Than Legal Recourse”
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120730/07105419881/social-shaming-works-faster-than-legal-recourse.shtml .................................................................. 7 3.
“Why Social-Media Shaming is Okay”
http://www.buzzfeed.com/mattbuchanan/why-social-media-shaming-is-okay ..... 7
Reward Your Curiosity
Everything you want to read.
Anytime. Anywhere. Any device.
No Commitment. Cancel anytime.