Stanford Center for Internet and Society

Since 2001, the Cyberlaw Clinic has been litigating this Internet anti-SLAPP case against Ampex after they sued Scott Cargle, a former employee who posted critical messages about the company on a Yahoo! message board. Today, after two trips to the Court of Appeal, we won. Download opinion.

The winning argument was performed by third year Carl Anderson. Other students over the years who worked on the case are Jim Pastore, Melvin Priester, Erica Platt, Nicole Acton, Michael Shapiro, Chris Sant, Jason Gondor, and many, many others who helped prepare for argument, read briefs and supported their colleagues at the hearings.

At a hearing on February 3, 2004, the Court denied defendant's motion for fees and costs under the California Anti-SLAPP statute. In reaching it's decision, the Court refused to consider any of the affidavits submitted in connection with the motion, even though the statute clearly requires a court to do so. Cyberlaw clinic students have filed an appeal, asking the Court of Appeal to rule that Ampex's original suit is a SLAPP and that defendant is entitled to fees and costs.

The Court issued this order denying Ampex's motion to strike the costs
awarded by the Court of Appeal. The Court ordered supplemental briefing on
the issue of whether Ampex had properly pled and proven special damages.
The briefs are here, here, here, and here.

This is the Appellate Court ruling in favor of the Cyberlaw Clinic position that the defendant in a First Amendment retaliatory lawsuit is entitled to attorney's fees if he would have been the prevailing party on a pending anti-SLAPP motion, even if the plaintiffs dismiss before the court can rule on the motion. Download file

Cyberlaw clinic students won an important ruling yesterday that the California Anti-SLAPP statute entitles anonymous defendants to file a Motion for Attorney’s fees even if a plaintiff successfully uncovers their identity and then flees to another state with weak or no anti-SLAPP protections.

Following oral argument by 2L Erica Platt, the California Court of Appeals agreed with the defendant and has remanded the matter back to the trial court for an attorney’s fee determination.

The San Francisco Chronicle has an article on the case, Ampex wins a round in its online slander lawsuit.