Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Amp Ex Opening

Amp Ex Opening

Ratings: (0)|Views: 5|Likes:
Published by market-abuse

More info:

Published by: market-abuse on Aug 23, 2007
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/22/2011

pdf

text

original

 
 
Jennifer Stisa Granick, California Bar No. 168423Carl Anderson, Certified Law StudentCENTER FOR INTERNET & SOCIETYCYBERLAW CLINIC559 Nathan Abbott WayStanford, California 94305-8610Telephone: (650) 724-0014Facsimile: (650) 723-4426Attorney for AppellantJohn Doe 1, aka “exampex,” aka SCOTT CARGLEIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALOF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIAIN AND FOR THE FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICTAMPEX CORPORATION,EDWARD J. BRAMSON,Plaintiffs and Respondents,v.J.DOE 1, AKA ‘EXAMPEX’ ON YAHOO!,AKA SCOTT CARGLEDefendant and Appellant.))))))))))))))))
District Court of AppealCase No. A106345DIVISION FOURSuperior Court No. C01-03627
 *****************************
 APPELLANT’S OPENING BRIEF
 *****************************DEPARTMENT 02THE HONORABLE BARBARA ZUNIGAJUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
 
 T
ABLE OF
C
ONTENTS
 
i
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES..............................................................................................
iii
ISSUE PRESENTED............................................................................................................1STATEMENT OF THE CASE............................................................................................1STATEMENT OF FACTS...................................................................................................4SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT...........................................................................................8ARGUMENT.........................................................................................................................9I. T
HIS
S
UIT
A
RISES
F
ROM THE
E
XACT
K
IND OF
A
CTIVITY
T
HAT
S
ECTION
425.16
 
I
S
M
EANT TO
P
ROTECT
:
 
C
ONSTITUTIONALLY
P
ROTECTED
S
PEECH IN
C
ONNECTION
W
ITH A
M
ATTER OF
P
UBLIC
I
NTEREST
...........................................9A. Appellant Made His Comments on an Internet Message BoardOpen to the Public– a Classic “Public Forum”.............................................10B. Appellant Spoke Out in Connection With a Matter of Public InterestWhen, in Response to Public Speculation About the Collapse of iNEXTV, He Offered His Opinion on the Management of a WidelyHeld, Public Company That Used the Internet to Promote its OwnVersion of Events........................................................................................12II. T
HE
T
RIAL
C
OURT
V
IOLATED THE
E
XPRESS
L
ANGUAGE OF
S
ECTION
425.16
 
W
HEN IT
I
MPROPERLY
R
EFUSED TO
C
ONSIDER
E
VIDENCE AND
A
FFIDAVITS
R
ELEVANT TO THE
Q
UESTION OF
W
HETHER
A
PPELLANT
I
S THE
P
REVAILING
P
ARTY
........................................................................................................................15III R
ESPONDENTS
F
AILED TO
D
EMONSTRATE A
P
ROBABILITY OF
P
REVAILINGON THE
M
ERITS OF
T
HEIR
C
LAIM
T
HAT
A
PPELLANT
S
O
PINIONS
W
ERE
A
CTIONABLE
D
EFAMATION
....................................................................................17A. Respondents Are Limited Purpose Public Figures Who AreRequired to Counter Unflattering Remarks With Their OwnSpeech Rather Than Through the Legal Process Unless They CanDemonstrate Actual MaliceWhich They Have Not..............................17
 
 
T
ABLE OF
C
ONTENTS
 
ii
B. Respondents Have Not Established Any Damages Caused ByAppellant’s Speech On a Matter of Public Concern, BecauseThey Cannot Show Either Constitutional Malice or Actual Injury.......22C. Respondents Have Not Met Their Burden of Proving That theStatements at Issue Are False Statements of Fact, Rather ThanNon-Actionable Opinion, Hyperbole, and Rhetoric...............................241. The context of Appellant’s statements on theYahoo! message board show that they arenon-actionable opinions..................................................................262. The language of Appellant’s statements postedon the Yahoo! message board show that they arenon-actionable opinions..................................................................273. Respondents have failed to provide evidence of falsity.............28IV. A
PPELLANT
A
SKS
T
HIS
C
OURT TO
H
OLD
T
HAT
H
E IS THE
P
REVAILING
P
ARTY
 
U
NDER
S
ECTION
425.16
AND
T
O
A
WARD
C
OSTS AND
F
EES AS
R
EQUIRED BY THE
S
TATUTE
...................................................................................28CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................29CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCEPROOF OF SERVICE

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->