Meghan Markle Wins Dismissal of Defamation Go well with Introduced by Half-Sister Samantha Markle


See right now’s choice by Choose Charlene Edwards Honeywell (M.D. Fla.) in Markle v. Markle. There’s loads happening there, however right here is one excerpt. First, one defamatory passage from an Oprah Winfrey interview, with the allegedly defamatory materials underlined:

Oprah Winfrey: And Samantha Markle, your half-sister in your father’s aspect, has written a, a supposedly inform all guide about you. What’s … your relationship together with her?

Defendant: I feel it could be very laborious to inform all when you do not know me. And … it is a very totally different scenario than my dad, proper? If you speak about betrayal, betrayal comes from somebody that you’ve got a relationship with. Proper? I do not really feel comfy speaking about those who I actually do not know. However I grew up as an solely youngster, which everybody who grew up round me is aware of, and I needed I had siblings. I’d have cherished to have had siblings ….

And here is the court docket’s rejection of the declare that that is defamatory:

Right here, an inexpensive listener wouldn’t suppose that Defendant was suggesting that
she has no half-siblings, that Plaintiff doesn’t really exist, or that Plaintiff just isn’t
associated to her…. As an inexpensive listener would perceive it, Defendant merely expresses an opinion about her childhood and her relationship together with her half-siblings. Thus, the Courtroom finds that Defendant’s assertion just isn’t objectively verifiable or topic to empirical proof…. As a result of the assertion just isn’t “able to being proved false, it is protected against a defamation motion.”

Congratulations to Jonathan P. Steinsapir and Michael J. Kump (Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump and Aldisert), Nicholas Soltman, and Ronnie J. Bitman (Bitman, O’Brien & Morat, PLLC), who symbolize defendant.

Añadir un comentario

Tu dirección de correo electrónico no será publicada. Los campos obligatorios están marcados con *