• Home
  • About Us
    • Overview
    • Professionals
    • Publications
    • Join our Team
  • Practice Areas
    • Consumer Law & Contracts
    • Landlord & Tenant
    • Defamation
    • Family Law
    • Criminal Defense & Traffic
    • H-1B Visas
    • Estate Planning
    • Animal Law
    • Small Business
    • Zoning
  • Getting Started
  • Case Study
  • Blog
  • Media
    • SKL in the News
    • Eve Minter
  • Contact

Being Sued for a Negative Review Posted on Yelp, Angie’s List, Google or Another Website? The D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act Could Help 

1/6/2016

0 Comments

 
By Steven Krieger

As a consumer, you likely have many interactions with businesses each and every day.  Most of those interactions are innocuous and you never give them a second thought. However, on occasion, you may have a really wonderful experience with a particular business or a really terrible experience with another business.
 
If you’re active on social media (and even if you’re not), you may decide to leave a review for the business on a website like Yelp, Angie’s List, Google+, Bing, or Yahoo, to inform your fellow consumers about the details of your experience.
 
In fact, many businesses encourage consumers to leave positive reviews.  If a positive review was written, everyone is happy.  

But, what happens when your experience is negative?  Typically, the consumer attempts to resolve the dispute with the business and the business has an opportunity to do “do right” by the consumer.  Unfortunately, sometimes the dispute cannot or will not be resolved and the consumer goes online and leaves a negative review about the business and the experience.
 
Local business (big or small) take these negative reviews very seriously.  In fact, if the business is able to identify the consumer who left the review, the business may file a complaint in court and will likely claim that the review is defamatory. 
 
Defamation is the general term that describes a printed (libel) or spoken (slander) statement that hurts ones character or reputation.  A negative review posted online will likely harm a business and could be defamatory -- libel, specifically.  However, if the statements are truthful or entirely subjective, the consumer has a valid defense against such a defamation claim.
 
But, even if the consumer has a valid defense, the consumer still must defend the defamation claim, which will cost the consumer time and money.  In the 1990’s, business began to sue or threatened to sue consumers primarily for the purpose of intimidating consumers into removing the negative reviews. The Public Participation Project explains it best: “[t]hese types of lawsuits are known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs).  SLAPPs are used to silence and harass.  [Businesses filing these complaints in court] don’t go to court to seek justice, but instead, to intimidate those who disagree with them or their activities” and who speak out.  In 1992, Delaware became the first state to pass an Anti-SLAPP Act.  Currently, there are almost thirty states that have passed some type of Anti-SLAPP Act and the Public Participation Project is trying to pass federal Anti-SLAPP legislation. The Anti-SLAPP acts were passed to help consumers defend against harassing lawsuits filed to stifle First Amendment freedom of speech rights.
 
D.C. passed an Anti-SLAPP act that became effective on March 31, 2011 and was codified as D.C. Code § 16-5501 to 16-5505.  The D.C. Anti-SLAPP explains that these SLAPP suits should be dismissed if (1) “the claim at issue arises from an act in furtherance of the right of advocacy on issues of public interest,” and (2) the business cannot “demonstrate[] that the claim is likely to succeed on the merits.” See D.C. Code § 16-5502(b).
 
In other words, if the consumer who posted the negative review on Yelp or anywhere else online is able to demonstrate that the review (or any other type of statement -- online or offline) was made to further some type of advocacy on an issue of public interest, then the business must demonstrate that the business is likely to win the case if the court allows the case to proceed. Otherwise, the lawsuit filed by the business must be dismissed and the consumer’s negative review may remain online.
 
In addition to allowing the consumer to immediately file a motion to dismiss and avoid the hassle of time-consuming and expensive litigation, the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act of 2010 allows the consumer to recover attorneys’ fees if the consumer prevails with the Anti-SLAPP defense in whole or in part.  Specifically, §16-5504(a) states: “[t]he court may award a moving party who prevails, in whole or in part, on a motion brought under § 16-5502 or § 16-5503 the costs of litigation, including reasonable attorney fees.”
 
The attorneys’ fees provision is critical because without the ability for the consumer to recover these fees, the consumer may not be able to afford an attorney to file the special motion to dismiss and the consumer may decide to simply remove the negative review instead of defending the lawsuit, which is exactly what the business was hoping for all along.
 
If you’ve had a negative experience with a business and posted a negative review for the business online (Yelp, Angie’s List, Google+, Bing, Yahoo, or anywhere else – online or offline), which resulted in the business filing a lawsuit against you in D.C., the D.C. Anti-SLAPP Act was designed to help you defend yourself against this type of lawsuit from a business that likely has access to more resources, including money, than you.
 
If you’re defending yourself against a SLAPP suit, please feel free to contact my office for a consultation.  
0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Author

    Steven and guests (lawyers and non-lawyers) will periodically post about topics relevant to his firm and practice areas. Your comments and feedback are always welcome. 

    Archives

    September 2020
    June 2020
    July 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    June 2018
    April 2018
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    September 2016
    August 2016
    June 2016
    January 2016
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013

    Categories

    All
    Business Entity
    Child Support
    Consumer Law
    Criminal Law
    Custody
    Debt Collection
    Defamation
    Employment Law
    Evidence
    Family Law
    H-1B
    Immigration
    Intellectual Property
    Landlord & Tenant
    Legal Malpractice
    Legal Theory
    Litigation
    Low Bono
    Plain English Guide
    Pro Se
    Spousal Support
    Visitation

    RSS Feed

    Legal Disclaimer

    The blog postings and information on this site are provided for informational purposes only and is only meant to provide a general overview or description of the law and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements.  It is not, nor is it intended to be, specific legal advice, which requires an analysis based on the specific factors unique to each case.  Therefore, do not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any content included on this site without seeking a confidential consultation from a knowledgeable attorney.

    By accessing this site you acknowledge that this information is not provided in the course of an attorney-client relationship, is not intended to constitute legal advice, and Steven Krieger Law, PLLC expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website.

Consumer Protection Law & Contracts
Landlord & Tenant
Defamation &  Fraud
Family Law
Criminal/Traffic
​Animal Law
​Estate Planning
H-1B Visa Wage Disputes
Small Business
Zoning
Steven Krieger Law, PLLC
2200 Wilson Blvd. Suite 102
Arlington, VA 22201
Phone: 703.831.7707
Fax: 
571.512.5814​
steven@stevenkriegerlaw.com
Legal Disclaimer & Terms of Use
​
Click to set custom HTML
© Copyright 2013-21 Steven Krieger Law, PLLC