Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Yelp, Inc. v. Hadeed Carpet Cleaning, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided January 7, 2014No. 0116134Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

HALEY, S.J.,

concurring, in part, and dissenting, in part.

I concur with the majority: (1) that the trial court had subpoena jurisdiction over Yelp, and (2) that Code § 8.01-407.1 provides a procedural and substantive path of analysis for determining the propriety of issuing an unmasking subpoena duces tecum which constitutionally balances the First Amendment protection of an anonymous speaker and the right of redress for defamation.

Code § 8.01-407.1(A)(1)(a), (b), and (c) define the “supporting material” to be attached to the request for an unmasking subpoena duces tecum. This dissent…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Turpin v. BranamanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1950

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API