Quixtar, Inc. v. Signature Management NV, 566 F.Supp.2d 1205 (2008)

Does the Plaintiff's need to destroy the anonymity of the speaker have precedence over the anonymous speaker's right to remain anonymous?

more+
less-

Quixtar sued Signature Management Team (Team) claiming that agents of Team had tortiously interfering with Quixtar's existing business relationships and contracts by waging an internet campaign against Quixtar. During a deposition of Dickie, a Team employee responsible for web content, Quixtar asked if he were responsible for the content of various websites, blogs and internet videos. Dickie's lawyer objected, claiming the authors of the content had a 1st Amendment right to remain anonymous. Quixtar moved to compel.

Full case and case summary also available online at: http://www.mlmlegal.com/legal-cases/Quixtar_v_SignatureManagementNV.php

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Published In: Civil Procedure Updates, MLM / Direct Sales Updates, MLM Consulting / Network Marketing Updates

Reference Info:Federal, 9th Circuit, Nevada | United States

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Babener & Associates | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

CONNECT

Welcome to MLM Legal - a valuable resource to the Multi-Level Marketing and Direct Sales Industry. ... View Profile »


Follow Babener & Associates:

Reporters on Deadline