Former U.S. Attorney Kendall Coffey appeared on the Steve Malzberg Show last week to discuss current legal cases. One of the cases involved a family that is suing film maker Spike Lee. Lee posted an address on Twitter that he claimed was the address of George Zimmerman, the man who shot Florida teen Trayvon Martin. The address was incorrect, however, and the couple actually at the posted address recieved threatening letters and harassment.
The George Zimmerman case gained a lot of attention from racial equality advocates and Lee was likely trying to incite the harassment directed at Zimmerman. The couple is suing Spike Lee for either defamation or intentional infliction of emotional distress. Kendall Coffey explained that while the case is sympathetic there may not be enough legal grounds for the lawsuit.
"People who value the law as you and I do like to say that for every wrong there must be a remedy. This certainly seems like a wrong, at least the way it’s presented by the plaintiffs. And one might think there must be some kind of remedy if indeed they suffered what we understand could well have been a firestorm of threats and abuse.
"But a few years back the Supreme Court of Florida decided that the kind of claim for what they call violation of privacy, putting somebody or casting somebody in a false light through publicity that’s damaging, that by itself is no longer, in the state of Florida, a valid basis to bring a claim for damages.
"What these individuals would have to claim is either something called intentional infliction of emotional distress, and it’s hard to think that they can show enough intentionality. Maybe they can on the part of Spike Lee. Or, they can present it as a claim of defamation, maybe they can get somewhere. But, despite what makes us all sympathetic, if indeed what happened here is as they describe it, I’m not convinced they’re going to get to first base, and certainly not to second base, in terms of a lawsuit. Given that the decision the Supreme Court of Florida made, which actually gives less protection for individuals whose privacy rights are invaded and are wrongly subjected to negative publicity.”
 |
| Spike Lee tweeted an address he thought was George Zimmerman's |
"People who value the law as you and I do like to say that for every wrong there must be a remedy. This certainly seems like a wrong, at least the way it’s presented by the plaintiffs. And one might think there must be some kind of remedy if indeed they suffered what we understand could well have been a firestorm of threats and abuse.
"But a few years back the Supreme Court of Florida decided that the kind of claim for what they call violation of privacy, putting somebody or casting somebody in a false light through publicity that’s damaging, that by itself is no longer, in the state of Florida, a valid basis to bring a claim for damages.
"What these individuals would have to claim is either something called intentional infliction of emotional distress, and it’s hard to think that they can show enough intentionality. Maybe they can on the part of Spike Lee. Or, they can present it as a claim of defamation, maybe they can get somewhere. But, despite what makes us all sympathetic, if indeed what happened here is as they describe it, I’m not convinced they’re going to get to first base, and certainly not to second base, in terms of a lawsuit. Given that the decision the Supreme Court of Florida made, which actually gives less protection for individuals whose privacy rights are invaded and are wrongly subjected to negative publicity.”
No comments:
Post a Comment