Life Designs Ranch, Inc. v. Michael Sommer
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partFearing, J.
¶40 — I conclude that plaintiff Life Designs Ranch Inc. presents sufficient facts to survive a summary judgment motion on its claims of defamation and tortious interference with business expectancy. Thus, I, in part, respectfully dissent from the majority. I concur with the majority’s ruling that Life Designs may not recover against Michael Sommer because of a hyperlink on his website to another site critical of Life Designs. I also concur that Life Designs and Vincent and Bobbie Barranco cannot recover in false light.
¶41 The majority commits three fundamental errors that lead to my partial…
2Cases cited73 opinions
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Herbert v. LandoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Dun & Bradstreet, Inc. v. Greenmoss Builders, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Hartley v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1985
- Leingang v. PIERCE CO. MED. BUREAU, INC.Washington Supreme Court · 1997
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.