Does anyone think we can successfully sue Pat under SLAPP?

[Imager]

From Wikipedia:

A strategic lawsuit against public participation (also known as a SLAPP suit or intimidation lawsuit)[1] is one intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.[2]

In the typical SLAPP, the plaintiff does not normally expect to win the lawsuit. The plaintiff's goals are accomplished if the defendant succumbs to fear, intimidation, mounting legal costs, or simple exhaustion and abandons the criticism. In some cases, repeated frivolous litigation against a defendant may raise the cost of directors and officers liability insurance for that party, interfering with an organization's ability to operate.[3] A SLAPP may also intimidate others from participating in the debate. A SLAPP is often preceded by a legal threat. SLAPPs bring about freedom of speech concerns due to their chilling effect and are often difficult to filter out and penalize because the plaintiffs attempt to obfuscate their intent to censor, intimidate, or silence their critics.

To protect freedom of speech some jurisdictions have passed anti-SLAPP laws (often called SLAPP-back laws). These laws often function by allowing a defendant to file a motion to strike and/or dismiss on the grounds that the case involves protected speech on a matter of public concern. The plaintiff then bears the burden of showing a probability that they will prevail.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think Patrick has shown now twice that what he's doing falls under SLAPP.

If Quasi was in a different financial situation this board would be dead and who knows if one would have replaced it. Patrick has tried and failed to use the court system to infringe on our right to call him a tubby lardass with a frigidaire wife.

 

[Pringle Can Lothario]

How about I slap that fucker, and his fridge beard. And the fridge beard's mother for enabling all this shit.

 

[guest]

I'm not a lawyer, but slapp is a "responsive pleading", meaning its a response to a claim ( e.g. defamation). Wisconsin doesn't have any slapp laws anyway. In some states there's a subset of regulations that are commonly referred to as "slapp back", which are essentially malicious prosecution causes of action (that are referenced in your link). California has this. That is probably what you are talking about.

 

[Slackjawed Cow]

How about I slap that fucker, and his fridge beard. And the fridge beard's mother for enabling all this shit.

 

[Imager]

damn that's brutal. what's that from?

 

[Slackjawed Cow]

damn that's brutal. what's that from?

I think its some eastern bloc slap contest

 

[Cygnus Nana X-1]

I'm not a lawyer, but slapp is a "responsive pleading", meaning its a response to a claim ( e.g. defamation). Wisconsin doesn't have any slapp laws anyway. In some states there's a subset of regulations that are commonly referred to as "slapp back", which are essentially malicious prosecution causes of action (that are referenced in your link). California has this. That is probably what you are talking about.

I really want to believe that you're M. following us around laughing at our shenanigans. Thank you for your legal opinions even though you are clearly not a lawyer as indicated by your username.

 

[NortheastPhilly]

At this point I dont think theres anything we cant do if we set our minds to it

 

[SmellenShoehorn]

my nigga Dumpling

See, that's how you can be fat and an actual tough guy, chubs.

 

[RobertMewler]

 

[Uncle Floyd]

His spirit flew the fuck out of him.