Comments on: “Publication of false information concerning the City of Pomona” http://overlawyered.com/2007/05/publication-of-false-information-concerning-the-city-of-pomona/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=publication-of-false-information-concerning-the-city-of-pomona Chronicling the high cost of our legal system Sun, 27 May 2012 05:00:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Walter Olson http://overlawyered.com/2007/05/publication-of-false-information-concerning-the-city-of-pomona/comment-page-1/#comment-7270 Walter Olson Mon, 14 May 2007 11:08:16 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4903#comment-7270 Even assuming that the reportage was false and injurious, <a href="http://instapundit.com/archives2/005128.php" rel="nofollow">Glenn Reynolds asks</a>, "why is the City Attorney making legal threats on behalf of a private interest? Because the city has no interest in not being libeled, and the City Manager's interest is a personal one. Does the City Attorney routinely do personal legal work for city officials?" Even assuming that the reportage was false and injurious, Glenn Reynolds asks, “why is the City Attorney making legal threats on behalf of a private interest? Because the city has no interest in not being libeled, and the City Manager’s interest is a personal one. Does the City Attorney routinely do personal legal work for city officials?”

]]> By: Supremacy Claus http://overlawyered.com/2007/05/publication-of-false-information-concerning-the-city-of-pomona/comment-page-1/#comment-7269 Supremacy Claus Mon, 14 May 2007 03:54:22 +0000 http://overlawyered.com/wpblog/?p=4903#comment-7269 From the remaining commentary, the blog alleged sexual conduct by an old official with a young woman. Names were named. So, this was not disparagement of governance, which is absolutely protected. The lawyer included an unfortunate phrase alluding to the city's reputation. I am surprised by Prof. Volokh's missing this point. The bigger question for him is whether an anonymous character, a fictional entity, the blog may label an utterance as a rumor, and still be sued for libel of real people. What if the libel were of another fictional but identifiable character (identifiable to co-workers, for example)? As a fictional character, I think about those questions. From the remaining commentary, the blog alleged sexual conduct by an old official with a young woman. Names were named.

So, this was not disparagement of governance, which is absolutely protected. The lawyer included an unfortunate phrase alluding to the city’s reputation.

I am surprised by Prof. Volokh’s missing this point.

The bigger question for him is whether an anonymous character, a fictional entity, the blog may label an utterance as a rumor, and still be sued for libel of real people. What if the libel were of another fictional but identifiable character (identifiable to co-workers, for example)?

As a fictional character, I think about those questions.

]]>