Dana Desjardins v. Michael Reynolds
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1DissentJabar, J.
[¶ 22] I respectfully dissent for two reasons. First, the Court’s decision overstates the protection afforded to petitioning activity. The decision prevents what would otherwise be a meritorious case of defamation from proceeding in our courts. The Court states that Maine’s anti-SLAPP statute, 14 M.R.S. § 556 (2016), “create[s] a procedure for the prompt dismissal of lawsuits that challenge any actions that fall within that broad definition of petitioning activity.” Court’s Opinion ¶ 18 (emphasis added). This is not accurate; the statute was intended to protect petitioning activity from…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Curtis v. PorterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- Rippett v. BemisSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Morse Bros., Inc. v. WebsterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- Batchelder v. Realty Resources Hospitality, LLCSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2007
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.