If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post)   Pet-sitting company who sued customer over negative Yelp review loses SLAPP bet, must chose between 10 slaps now or 5 slaps between now and the end of time   ( washingtonpost.com) divider line
    More: Fail, Appeal, Pets, justice court, Law, Lawsuit, Civil procedure, non-disparagement clause, Plaintiff  
•       •       •

2595 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Nov 2017 at 3:20 PM (32 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



37 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-11-09 11:42:36 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 11:47:03 AM  
Just in time for slapsgiving!
 
2017-11-09 11:55:14 AM  
Wow.  After reading that article, that's a BUNCH of appeals, dismissals, and refilings.

Those lawyers are making out like gangsters.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2017-11-09 11:59:26 AM  
The recent decision simply sent the case back for a hearing on the merits. It did not slap or SLAPP the plaintiffs. The trial court may choose to do so.
 
2017-11-09 12:08:02 PM  
i.chzbgr.comView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 03:22:00 PM  
Politics tab?
 
2017-11-09 03:28:09 PM  

skyotter: Politics tab?


This.

Also, yelp sucks but this is stupid.
 
2017-11-09 03:30:17 PM  
Who's the slapmissioner?
 
2017-11-09 03:31:01 PM  
media.giphy.comView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 03:31:30 PM  
The best thing about anti-SLAPP laws is that they explicitly recognize that it's possible for a bigger/richer entity to sue a smaller/poorer entity into oblivion without having any legal leg to stand on.  Forcing participants to recognize that bringing a suit against someone generates costs, whether they win or lose, is pretty damned important.
 
2017-11-09 03:31:32 PM  
media.giphy.comView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 03:32:37 PM  
The nuisance libel lawsuits are used to suppress valid speech under fear and inability to pay for representation. Even if the plantiff drops the case, you've already paid for representation. You are out of money for using your first amendment right, and these laws should make it expensive to file nuisance suits. Also, it's now attractive to lawyers to represent such cases because there's money to be had.
 
2017-11-09 03:38:45 PM  

Non Sequitur Man: [i.chzbgr.com image 400x300]


You old hippie. Wonder how many fakers get this.
 
2017-11-09 03:40:30 PM  
media.giphy.comView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 03:43:48 PM  

imauniter: Non Sequitur Man: [i.chzbgr.com image 400x300]

You old hippie. Wonder how many fakers get this.


I'm sure some of us got it :)
 
2017-11-09 03:44:54 PM  

GanjSmokr: Wow.  After reading that article, that's a BUNCH of appeals, dismissals, and refilings.

Those lawyers are making out like gangsters.


Yeah, I got lost by like the second time they went to court.
 
2017-11-09 03:54:41 PM  
I think both sides need a good slappin'.
 
2017-11-09 03:58:07 PM  
Anyone care to translate that article into English?
 
2017-11-09 04:01:23 PM  
These dogs have started a cat-sitting service, if you would like to use it...

DOGS SITTING ON CATS COLLECTION
Youtube jReNhveg5_0
 
2017-11-09 04:19:43 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 04:34:57 PM  
Companies should NEVER be able to prevent a review, if something really is libel or slander then that is already covered.  Me saying on Yelp I thought your potstickers sucked and your schezwan beef was less spicy than a can of Chef Boyardee is an opinion man and needs to be protected.

Come on where are all the libertarians who always say "just sue" the companies?
 
2017-11-09 05:15:51 PM  
If you are such an a-hole that you go around suing your clients over a Yelp review, you are already businessing wrong and your company is probably not long for this world.

Streisand Effect Petsitting will likely be learning this soon.
 
2017-11-09 05:26:25 PM  

interstellar_tedium: Companies should NEVER be able to prevent a review, if something really is libel or slander then that is already covered.  Me saying on Yelp I thought your potstickers sucked and your schezwan beef was less spicy than a can of Chef Boyardee is an opinion man and needs to be protected.

Come on where are all the libertarians who always say "just sue" the companies?


I agree.  They can rebut the review but should not be able to suppress it or remove it and it should be illegal for companies to offer to remove or suppress negative reviews for a fee.
 
2017-11-09 05:36:01 PM  
The Duchouquettes?
 
2017-11-09 05:48:04 PM  

grimlock1972: interstellar_tedium: Companies should NEVER be able to prevent a review, if something really is libel or slander then that is already covered.  Me saying on Yelp I thought your potstickers sucked and your schezwan beef was less spicy than a can of Chef Boyardee is an opinion man and needs to be protected.

Come on where are all the libertarians who always say "just sue" the companies?

I agree.  They can rebut the review but should not be able to suppress it or remove it and it should be illegal for companies to offer to remove or suppress negative reviews for a fee.


Actually I would love websites including Yelp to put in big bold letters for anyone company with this sort of shiat in the contract  "This company will sue anyone posting a negative review", would make me decide to go elsewhere and I am pretty sure make everyone ignore that 4.3/5 rating.  Make doing this sort of shiat a quick trip to no customer land.

Had someone I contacted for doing renovations have this sort of BS, they got sued to the ground over it as well they should.
 
2017-11-09 06:19:02 PM  

Russ1642: Anyone care to translate that article into English?


1. Couple hired company to babysit their fish.
2. Fish sitters over fed the fish.
3. Couple posted a negative reviews on Yelp.
4. Fish sitters filed a libel suit against couple.
5. Before things went to court, fish sitters filed a "notice of nonsuit", meaning they wanted to pretend the whole thing never happened.
6. Couple was stuck with $10K in attorney fees.
7. Thanks to anti-SLAPP laws, the libel suit was not lawful.
8. The judge has ruled the couple can sue for attorney fees for having to defend against a suit that should not have been allowed to proceed in the first place.
 
2017-11-09 07:01:56 PM  
Can a company really put in their contract that customer to do nothing to adversely affect said company? If so why would you agree? What if company burned down you damn house? The contract says there is nothing bad you can say about them?
Confusing article is confusing.
 
2017-11-09 07:11:43 PM  

interstellar_tedium: grimlock1972: interstellar_tedium: Companies should NEVER be able to prevent a review, if something really is libel or slander then that is already covered.  Me saying on Yelp I thought your potstickers sucked and your schezwan beef was less spicy than a can of Chef Boyardee is an opinion man and needs to be protected.

Come on where are all the libertarians who always say "just sue" the companies?

I agree.  They can rebut the review but should not be able to suppress it or remove it and it should be illegal for companies to offer to remove or suppress negative reviews for a fee.

Actually I would love websites including Yelp to put in big bold letters for anyone company with this sort of shiat in the contract  "This company will sue anyone posting a negative review", would make me decide to go elsewhere and I am pretty sure make everyone ignore that 4.3/5 rating.  Make doing this sort of shiat a quick trip to no customer land.

Had someone I contacted for doing renovations have this sort of BS, they got sued to the ground over it as well they should.


agreed. Mind i do not use Yelp  as i consider it tainted and unreliable Info in many cases.
 
2017-11-09 07:11:52 PM  

Snotty1: Can a company really put in their contract that customer to do nothing to adversely affect said company? If so why would you agree? What if company burned down you damn house? The contract says there is nothing bad you can say about them?
Confusing article is confusing.


Lots of people don't read all the fine print or totally understand what it says.

Anti-disparagment clauses for consumers are now illegal in some states, but not all. A national law on the subject has been in the works for some time now. Inhave no idea what the latest on it is.
 
2017-11-09 07:32:36 PM  

Fireproof: Snotty1: Can a company really put in their contract that customer to do nothing to adversely affect said company? If so why would you agree? What if company burned down you damn house? The contract says there is nothing bad you can say about them?
Confusing article is confusing.

Lots of people don't read all the fine print or totally understand what it says.

Anti-disparagment clauses for consumers are now illegal in some states, but not all. A national law on the subject has been in the works for some time now. Inhave no idea what the latest on it is.


You could, I guess, but such things will always run afoul of the 1st Amendment the minute you try to enforce them.
 
2017-11-09 10:31:56 PM  
i2-prod.irishmirror.ieView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 11:45:21 PM  

TheManofPA: [i2-prod.irishmirror.ie image 615x409]


assets.rbl.msView Full Size
 
2017-11-09 11:56:44 PM  

Boudyro: TheManofPA: [i2-prod.irishmirror.ie image 615x409]

[assets.rbl.ms image 280x158]


popkey.coView Full Size
 
2017-11-10 06:06:31 AM  

Snotty1: Can a company really put in their contract that customer to do nothing to adversely affect said company? If so why would you agree? What if company burned down you damn house? The contract says there is nothing bad you can say about them?
Confusing article is confusing.


You can put literally anything you want into a contract and people could sign it. That does not mean that the contract is enforceable.
 
2017-11-10 12:14:23 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Russ1642: Anyone care to translate that article into English?

1. Couple hired company to babysit their fish.
2. Fish sitters over fed the fish.
3. Couple posted a negative reviews on Yelp.
4. Fish sitters filed a libel suit against couple.
5. Before things went to court, fish sitters filed a "notice of nonsuit", meaning they wanted to pretend the whole thing never happened.
6. Couple was stuck with $10K in attorney fees.
7. Thanks to anti-SLAPP laws, the libel suit was not lawful.
8. The judge has ruled the couple can sue for attorney fees for having to defend against a suit that should not have been allowed to proceed in the first place.


You left out the early step of sitters k stipulates that client will not write anything negative about the sitters.
 
2017-11-10 07:36:53 PM  

interstellar_tedium: grimlock1972: interstellar_tedium: Companies should NEVER be able to prevent a review, if something really is libel or slander then that is already covered.  Me saying on Yelp I thought your potstickers sucked and your schezwan beef was less spicy than a can of Chef Boyardee is an opinion man and needs to be protected.

Come on where are all the libertarians who always say "just sue" the companies?

I agree.  They can rebut the review but should not be able to suppress it or remove it and it should be illegal for companies to offer to remove or suppress negative reviews for a fee.

Actually I would love websites including Yelp to put in big bold letters for anyone company with this sort of shiat in the contract  "This company will sue anyone posting a negative review", would make me decide to go elsewhere and I am pretty sure make everyone ignore that 4.3/5 rating.  Make doing this sort of shiat a quick trip to no customer land.

Had someone I contacted for doing renovations have this sort of BS, they got sued to the ground over it as well they should.


They basically do.  Here's the Yelp page for the farktards in question: https://www.yelp.com/biz/pr​estigious-p​ets-dallas
 
2017-11-10 07:54:23 PM  
You can put anything you want in a contract, that doesn't mean its legally valid.
 
Displayed 37 of 37 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report