NOTICE: THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITEDEXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED BY APPLICABLE RULES.See Ariz. R. Supreme Court 111(c); ARCAP 28(c); Ariz. R. Crim. P. 31.24

IN THE COURT OF APPEALSSTATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE

XCENTRIC VENTURES, LLC, an ) No. 1 CA-CV 11-0042Arizona limited liability )company; ED MAGEDSON, an ) DEPARTMENT Dindividual, ))

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Plaintiffs/Appellants, )) Not for Publicationv. ) (Rule 28, Arizona Rules) of Civil Appellate Procedure)JOHN F. BREWINGTON and JANE DOE )BREWINGTON, husband and wife; )and JFB ACQUISITIONS, LLC, an )Arizona limited liability )company, ))Defendants/Appellees. ) ________________________________)Appeal from the Superior Court in Maricopa CountyCause No. CV2008-008275The Honorable Larry Grant, Judge

AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, AND REMANDED

Jaburg & Wilk, P.C. PhoenixBy Maria Crimi SpethAttorneys for Plaintiffs/AppellantsGust Rosenfeld, P.L.C. PhoenixBy Richard A. SegalDean C. RobertsonChristopher B. IngleAttorneys for Defendants/AppelleesG E M M I L L, Judge

DIVISION ONEFILED:RUTH

WILLINGHAM,CLERK

BY:

12/22/2011

DLL

¶1

Plaintiffs Xcentric Ventures, L.L.C. and Ed Magedson,(collectively “Magedson” unless context requires otherwise)appeal from a grant of summary judgment to John and Jane DoeBrewington and JFB Acquisitions, L.L.C., collectively(“Brewington”). For the following reasons, we affirm in part,reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY¶2

Magedson is the managing member of Xcentric which ownsthe Internet forum called Ripoff Report (“ROR”). Magedson isalso the editor for ROR. ROR is a consumer advocacy websitethat allows consumers to post comments or complaints concerningtheir transactions with businesses.

¶3

In 2007, William Stanley began a series of postings onscam.com, among other sites, about Magedson and ROR. Stanleystarted a campaign to remove ROR from the Internet by contactingits Internet service providers or hosts and encouraging othersto do so. Stanley posted personal information about the ownersof the companies that did business with ROR. Stanley createdwebsites dedicated to disparaging ROR or its business partners.Each time ROR was bumped from its current Internet host —- basedon Stanley’s acts, Stanley would redirect his campaign towardany subsequent Internet company hosting ROR. In one postStanley stated: “Magedson has been removed from the following

3hosts last month” (listing eleven hosts) and “[w]e haveinformation [on] what datacenter he is moving to next and we arealready set up for protest.”

¶4

John Brewington, a private investigator, also followedStanley’s repeated attacks against ROR and made comments on thesame forum. Brewington reached out to Stanley and told him hewas writing a book on the industry, and they exchanged phonenumbers. Stanley and Brewington communicated several timesregarding Magedson or ROR. Brewington provided a list of ROR’scustomers to Stanley. Stanley contacted ROR’s customers tocontinue his campaign against Magedson. Brewington alsoprovided Stanley with information for one of ROR’s serviceproviders, Getnet, and Stanley through his same tacticseventually placed enough pressure on Getnet to provoke removalof ROR from Getnet’s servers. Both men were cooperating witheach other: Brewington provided referrals to Stanley and

askedStanley to remove an unfavorable website about Brewington calledwww.johnbrewington.net. Stanley, by email responded, “[i]t isdead.”

¶5

Magedson filed suit against Stanley in the UnitedStates District Court for the District of Arizona in June of2007. The district court apparently entered a default againstStanley in Magedson’s favor and eventually ordered injunctiverelief against Stanley.