X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
An attorney with Boston-based Bingham Dana led a legal team in what is believed to be one of the first judgments nationwide against those who defame others online. Attorney Charles L. Solomont, representing the bio-medical firm Biomatrix Inc. in New Jersey, won a ruling from the Bergen County Superior Court in New Jersey that found three individuals published libelous statements against Biomatrix on two Web sites. The two sites were a Yahoo message board and the message board of Genzyme Corporation in Cambridge, Mass., which plans to merge with Biomatrix by the end of this year. Defendants Richard and Raymond Costanzo of North Carolina and Ephraim Morris of Arizona will go to trial now to determine damages in the defamation suit. Raymond Costanzo and Morris are former employees of Biomatrix. No court date has been set. ANONYMOUS CLAIMS According to the court decision written by Superior Court Judge Peter F. Boggia, the three made anonymous claims online that officers of Biomatrix were “Nazi doctors” and that a major product of the firm, Synvisc, had killed several people. They claimed, in court papers, that [the plaintiffs] “cannot prove damages and no one would take the postings seriously.” But the court’s decision relied largely on a New Jersey Supreme Court ruling — Nappe v. Anschelewitz, Barr, Ansell & Bonello, 97 N.J. 37, 47 (1984) — that held “the courts have not adhered to the common-law distinction and have sustained actions in the absence of proof of compensatory damage. These include libel, slander per se, nuisance and malicious prosecution.” Solomont said the original lawsuit was filed against “John Does,” because the identities of the perpetrators were not known. With help from Yahoo, he said, “We determined who they were around the time the companies announced the merger. Their statements could potentially have some serious ramifications for the companies, and an impact on shareholders reading them.” He said the decision has far-ranging implications for other cases now pending nationwide, in which anonymous, defaming claims are made against individuals and other entities. “People post these messages using aliases and believe it protects them from liability for their actions. But this case shows the perpetrators of [such] online claims can be prosecuted.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.