Wednesday, July 29, 2015

Scarinci: "The Hoboken Horse that Roared"

 Thank you, Donald.
"Few people might care about the rough and tumble politics of a little town in Hudson County, but bloggers across the country celebrate Roman Brice and Nancy Pincus as First Amendment superstars and protectors of cyber-speech. 

The Court’s decision sends a strong message to public figures who may seek to use a defamation claim to silence their political foes. It also signals that courts are beginning to consistently apply First Amendment Protections to new media, such as blogs, message boards, and social media. 

“Plaintiffs were limited public figures who manipulated their attorney to perpetrate and perpetuate a SLAPP-suit disguised as a defamation case involving weighty issues of constitutionally First Amendment political speech,” Judge Arre stated."
-Donald Scarinci, PolitickerNJ- July 29, 2015 


25 comments:

  1. You got the eye of the tiger, a fighter, dancing through the fire 'Cause you are a champion and they're gonna hear you roar !

    ReplyDelete
  2. This
    Is
    AWESOME

    Glad to see that this story still has legs state wide. GA, Horse, the 3rd defendant and their lawyers earned every once of praise in that article. Great to see

    ReplyDelete
  3. are plaintiffs actually going to appeal or was that just bluster? they said they were appealing the original decision and to the best of my knowledge never did. hope there's a time limit after which they are forced to immediately fork over a bunch of big-ass checks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The judgment is attached to their assets. The judgment can be enforced.

      Delete
    2. but my question is whether or not plaintiffs were appealing the judgment.

      Delete
    3. They have 45 days from the7/8 judgment. But I doubt whether anyone can or will talk about what is going on.

      Delete
    4. 45 days is on or before August 22.

      Delete
    5. TICK TICK BOOM !

      IS IT OVER ?

      Delete
    6. Oh yeah, that's right, deadline for appeal was August 22. Where do things stand, are they appealing? Hope not, this charade has dragged out long enough.

      Delete
    7. I am not sure what I am allowed to say at this time.

      Delete
    8. Thanks, GA. Best to be cautious about what you say, good luck either way.

      Delete
  4. Hector Torres JunyaJuly 29, 2015 at 2:44 PM

    Wow, this is big state of New Jersey news! Wonder what spread the Hudson Reporter is planning. Maybe I should write them a letter in case they forget.

    Oh yeah, and maybe Hoboken411 should get a letter. Has anyone seen him? He's been very quiet and some say in hiding.

    Gee, I wonder why?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Hector Torres Jr. I am humbled by Mr. Scarinci's words, but agree that the Arre decision has major consequences re: protections for First Amendment internet political speech, as it should discourage filing of SLAPP suits.

      Persons engaged in political life, persons who try to influence public opinion on matters of public interest and public concern, in speech, in writing, through their activities, etc. meet the 'minimum' definition of 'limited public figure' or are public figures. So, the Arre decision will give such persons pause before they file a SLAPP suit, like the political operative Bajardis foolishly and recklessly did. Attorney sanctions like those given to the Bajardi lawyers should give other lawyers pause before taking on frivolous defamation claims by clients who are engaged in political life.

      Delete
  5. Oh nooooo! Lane and Kimbo are going to sue the Donald! He is going to lose his condo to Little Lane!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nah, I don't think Lane will be suing any more NJ residents threatenting he and Beth are going to get their condo.

      I think Ricky is plenty fed up with the FinBoy legal experiment gone bad. Last thing he expected was to get exposed let alone humiliated by the court designating their little legal expedition a SLAPP-suit.

      Delete
    2. I wonder if Ricky knows what emails of his the Bajardis gave up. Ricky got played big. And the dullest tool in the box is STILL letting Finboy scam his wife with cooked polls. It's a riot to see Finboy, the Mean Girl and othe Masonistas fellate Ricky on Facebook: oh Ricky... suck suck suck slurp slurp slurp The harder they suck, the more dollars spray out?

      Delete
  6. Judge Arre's sanctioning of the Bajardi's lawyers should have a chilling effect on any talk about an appeal. The arrogance of both the attorney's and their clients to make any statement to the contrary is very revealing of how deep their sickness runs.

    Presumably, when they lose on appeal, those costs get added to the judgment too, although any judge who's asked to take this case on appeal will be likely to reject the request when they read Arre's scathing indictment of this abuse of the courts.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Do you really think the Mason's will step up and foot for this entire judgment? While it's ONLY THE OPINION of some people that they are in some way involved, if true then I wonder if they'd make the Bajardis take at least some of the hit. Either way, someone on Team Mason is out a big chunk of change.

    Maybe they can hold a fundraiser at Room 84, or hold a cake sale outside their walkup. I'm sure the Hoboken Reporter would help out by promoting it as "a Hoboken couple" in need of community support for being "victims" of attacks from the "most powerful political machine" on the east coast, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not just the judgment, the cost of the appeal and legal fees for 3 sets of lawyers who oppose it. The checkbook will really get squeezed. He knows it too. It could go on for years on his dime.

      The legal system should have protections from mentally disturbed plaintiffs like those two and that's my OPINION. The courts failed to protect the First Amendment from two crazies and their phony complaint. Do you know that Kim Bajardi was "defamed" by a post saying she lived in Edgewater? In my OPINION that's crazy. As crazy as some imaginary powerful machine she claims to be persecuted by, or screaming at Michael Lenz he is a "bad Catholic." The courts failed to dismiss this garbage before it wasted everybody's time and money. Some day, I hope all 12 or however many of you there are get punitive damages from the crazies and their lawyers.

      Delete
    2. Mrs. Plaintiff has enough loose screws to open a hardware store.

      Delete
    3. Actually, there was no "post" saying anything about Kim Cardinal. There was an email referencing two screen names were "reported" to have moved to Edgewater.

      Lane Bajardi and Kim Cardinal Bajardi claimed they were never the two screen names in question.

      Yet they wanted $2,000,000 for that "reported" reference to screen names.

      That is another illustration of a SLAPP-suit in action.

      Delete
  8. Isn't Donald Scarinci Jamie Cryan's boss in West New York ?

    ReplyDelete
  9. In fairness the Edgewater claim was clearly false and defamatory - to the town of Edgewater and all its residents. The defendants are lucky they got sued by the wrong plaintiffs. If anybody falsely claimed the Bajardis had moved into my building my neighbors and I would sue in an instant and unlike the Bajardis we'd have no problem proving damages since just the possibility of having to share an elevator with them could cause property values to plummet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not only that, the condo association would have to bring in an exorcist. Exorcisms cost a pretty penny.

      Delete