Noncommercial speaker can’t get fees for successfully defending Lanham Act claim

Tobinick v. Novella, 2015 WL 4698549,  NO. 9:14–CV–80781  (S.D. Fla. Aug. 6, 2015)
 
The defendant Society for Science–Based Medicine, Inc.,
which
won dismissal of Lanham Act claims against it
, moved for attorneys’ fees,
and the court denied the motion.  The
court had previously ruled that the allegedly false/defamatory statements
attributed to the Society weren’t commercial speech.  The court applied the standard allowing fee
awards in “exceptional” cases to require “malicious, fraudulent, deliberate, or
willful” behavior. 
 
The Society argued that Tobinick pursued the Lanham Act
claims knowing them to be frivolous, given the requirement of commercial
speech.  The articles at issue,
challenging the were published on the Science-Based Medicine blog, whose relationship
with the Society was not entirely clear. 
But the court found that this case had been serious enough to require
six months between filing and dismissal, and had required oral argument.  Indeed, the court converted the motion to
dismiss into a motion for summary judgment and considered dozens of exhibits.  The issue of whether the speech was
commercial required a “lengthy and detailed” ruling, and the court’s ruling was
the first substantive ruling on the Lanham Act claim; before that, plaintiffs
didn’t have reason to know they’d lose.

from Blogger http://ift.tt/1ICXFkp

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s