IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
____________________________________)BRADLEE DEAN and YOU CAN RUN
)
BUT YOU CANNOT HIDE )INTERNATIONAL )Plaintiffs, ) Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-00283 (RJL))v. ))NBC UNIVERSAL (NBC), MSNBC and )RACHEL MADDOW,
)
)Defendants. )____________________________________)
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OFSPECIAL MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO D.C. ANTI-SLAPP ACT OF 2010AND MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 12(B)(6)
Laura R. Handman (D.C. Bar No. 444386)
John Rory Eastburg (D.C. Bar No. 984434)Davis Wright Tremaine LLP1919 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 800Washington, D.C. 20006-3401(202) 973-4200laurahandman@dwt.comroryeastburg@dwt.comSusan Weiner (pro hac vice pending)Chelley E. Talbert (pro hac vice pending)NBCUniversal Media, LLC30 Rockefeller PlazaNew York, New York 10112-0002(212) 664-2527susan.weiner@nbcuni.comchelley.talbert@nbcuni.com
Attorneys for Defendants NBC Universal, MSNBC and Rachel Maddow
Case 1:12-cv-00283-RJL Document 10-1 Filed 04/16/12 Page 1 of 51
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ......................................................................................................... iiiINTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1FACTUAL BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................................3Plaintiffs Bradlee Dean and YCR ........................................................................................3The May 15, 2010 Sons of Liberty Broadcast .....................................................................5Public Debate Surrounding Dean’s Statements ...................................................................7The NBCUniversal Broadcasts ............................................................................................9Procedural History .............................................................................................................13The Complaint ...................................................................................................................15ARGUMENT .................................................................................................................................16I.
PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS ARE SUBJECT TO AN ANTI-SLAPPMOTION................................................................................................................16A.
The District Of Columbia Anti-SLAPP Statute BroadlyApplies To Claims That Target The Exercise Of FreeSpeech About Issues Of Public Interest .....................................................16B.
Plaintiffs’ Claims Fall Within The Scope Of TheAnti-SLAPP Statute Because They Arise From An ActIn Furtherance Of The Right Of Advocacy On Issues Of Public Interest ............................................................................................18C.
The Anti-SLAPP Statute’s Substantive Protections Apply In ADiversity Action .........................................................................................201.
The Anti-SLAPP statute is part of D.C.’s framework of substantive rights and remedies ...........................................................222.
Application of the Anti-SLAPP statute in federal court serves
Erie’s
twin aims ...................................................................................26
Case 1:12-cv-00283-RJL Document 10-1 Filed 04/16/12 Page 2 of 51
iiII.
OUTSIDE THE ANTI-SLAPP CONTEXT, DISMISSAL FOR FAILURETO STATE A CLAIM IS “PARTICULARLY APPROPRIATE”FOR LAWSUITS THAT TARGET PROTECTED SPEECH ..............................27III.
PLAINTIFFS CANNOT STATE A CLAIM, LET ALONEDEMONSTRATE THE CLAIMS ARE LIKELY TO SUCCEEDON THE MERITS .................................................................................................28A.
Plaintiffs’ Claims Based On The August 2010 Broadcast AreBarred By The Applicable Statute of Limitations .....................................29B.
Plaintiffs Cannot State A Claim For Defamation BecauseThey Fail To Identify Any False Statements Of Fact ................................291.
“[Dean] and YCR had advocated the executionof gays” ..........................................................................................312.
‘“Plaintiffs advocated using foreign enemies againstAmerica because Christians aren’t doing the job bykilling gays and lesbians”’ .............................................................353.
“Bloodthirsty” and “calling for an upping of thebloodshed in America’s culture wars” ...........................................384.
Maddow’s commentary is also protected by theFair Comment Privilege .................................................................42C.
The False Light Claim Fails For The Same Reasons AsDoes The Defamation Claim .....................................................................43CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................44
Case 1:12-cv-00283-RJL Document 10-1 Filed 04/16/12 Page 3 of 51
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
