Law Times

Law Times • June 21, 2010 NEWS PAGE 3 lawyers in a defamation suit by accusing four lawbuzz.ca posters of neglecting their duties as fo- rum moderators. But one defendant, personal injury lawyer Russell Howe, claims AdviceScene got its facts wrong in its reply to the lawyers' statements of defence and that only one defendant was a mod- erator on the now-defunct Law- buzz web site. In the libel suit, AdviceScene is seeking $500,000 in damag- es for statements made by the four defendant lawyers under pseudonyms on Lawbuzz in March 2009. Seven statements, all of which the defendants now admit to making in their own court fil- ings, were listed in the original statement of claim lodged in November. AdviceScene alleges the comments, which in some cases questioned the identity of a judge who con- tributes to the site, cast doubt on its legitimacy. None of the allegations have been proven in court. Lawbuzz agreed Lawbuzz posters had added duty: AdviceScene L BY MICHAEL McKIERNAN Law Times egal web site advicescene. com has stepped up its case against the defendant has the title of moderator has some different liability from the strict liability imposed I think is very wrong-headed and not in accordance with defamation law," he says. The fourth defendant, Van- couver lawyer Jenny Rutherford, filed her defence on June 11. She has not yet been served with a reply, but her lawyer Roger McConchie repeated the denial. "Jenny Rutherford was not, not, not a forum moderator of the Lawbuzz website at any time," he said in an e-mail to Law Times. "If the plaintiff in- tended to allege Ms. Ruther- ford was a forum moderator, it should have done so in the statement of claim, yet it did not. If the plaintiff had done so, Ms. Rutherford would have unequivocally denied that com- pletely unfounded allegation in her statement of defence." Rutherford's defence says the My defence speaks for itself, and I don't believe the claim against me has any merit. to provide the e-mail and IP addresses of the defendants as part of a no-cost settlement in January. AdviceScene went on to name all of the defendants in an amended statement of claim last month. Its reply to Howe's defence ends with a statement claim- ing moderators owed a higher duty than regular posters on Lawbuzz. "All four of the defendants, including the defendant Howe, were forum moderators and had the heightened responsibility to ensure the exchange of com- ments by various anonymous commentators were not defama- tory. Ironically, the defendant Howe not only failed to moder- ate the deluge of damaging and untrue statements but actively incited the co-defendant mod- erators to disparage the plaintiffs' business model and professional obligations under the various provincial law societies' rules of professional conduct." Virtually identical statements close out the replies to defen- dants Tycho Manson and Kevin Preston, but Howe claims only Manson acted as a moderator. "He [AdviceScene lawyer An- tonin Pribetic] obviously decided to take the shotgun approach be- cause I was never a moderator," Howe tells Law Times. "It's just dead wrong. Pribetic declined to comment on the case. In the meantime, Manson's lawyer, Brian Rogers, confirms his client had been a modera- tor but calls the issue a "red her- ring." "The idea that someone who AdviceScene suit constitutes an abuse of process that she al- leges was "commenced with the vexatious attempt" to deter her from expressing her opinions. "This is a strate- gic lawsuit designed solely to interfere with Ms. Ruther- ford's right to free- dom of expression," the defence state- ment claims. Preston, meanwhile, declined to comment on the matter. Manson and Rutherford both draw attention to the large time gap between posting the comments and the initiation of the lawsuit. They also claim AdviceScene founder Nancy Kinney could have contacted them at any time through Law- buzz' private messaging system to ask for an apology or express her concerns. "If AdviceScene suffered any damages, which is not admitted but expressly denied, they are at- tributable to the acts and omis- sions of AdviceScene," Ruther- ford's defence alleges. Instead, she goes on to claim Kinney "expressed gratitude" for her two allegedly defamatory posts and that the AdviceScene founder "wished her good luck in her legal career" in a general reply on the web site. In his defence, Manson points to the fact that Kinney initiated the thread containing the com- ments. In a post introducing Ad- viceScene, Kinney also started a poll asking posters to express their thoughts about that type of site in Canada, Manson alleges. "Kinney's comments and her poll invited Lawbuzz users to show their opinions about the AdviceScene site," accord- ing to Manson's defence, which goes on to claim Kinney "gave every indication to Manson and others that she was pleased with the discussion. . . . AdviceScene therefore consented to the publication of the words com- plained of." But in its reply to Manson, AdviceScene denies his claim. "The comments posted by Nancy Kinney on behalf of AdviceScene were neither an open invitation to disparage the plaintiff's business repu- tation nor were they carte LEGAL CONFERENCE PRODUCERS Do you have excellent research, writing, and people skills? Do you enjoy the challenge of new ideas? If so, then The Canadian Institute may be the right career move for you! We are Canada's leading provider of professional development conferences for senior executives, lawyers, and other professionals in the legal, business, and public sectors. We are looking for energetic, entrepreneurial individuals to join our expanding team. Apart from raw ambition, you will need to be intelligent and highly motivated and enjoy taking responsibility for projects in a fast-paced environment. Each position offers a high level of people contact and a diversity of tasks. As a lawyer in good standing, you will also have a minimum of two years of solid post call business experience. Be part of our unique organization and enjoy the many benefits including work-life balance and profit-sharing. Please send your resume and a persuasive cover letter to: mycareer@canadianinstitute.com www.canadianinstitute.com Untitled-3 1 6/16/10 12:31:53 PM Experienced Commercial Litigation Lawyers Required Toronto law fi rm requires two commercial litigation lawyers: First position: • 4-6 years of direct commercial litigation experience in Toronto courts • Well organized with above average client skills • Ability to work independently and also as part of a team Second Position: • 10+ years of direct commercial litigation experience in Ontario • Minimum of 10 trials and 30 contested motions • Leadership and administrative abilities (this is a partnership track position) • Results oriented – must have excellent track record The fi rm offers challenging and interesting work, collegial fi rm culture & competitive compensation package. All applications held in strict confi dence: torontolitigationposition@gmail.com Heydary_LT_June21_01.indd 1 www.lawtimesnews.com 6/16/10 3:26:02 PM blanche to incite a deluge of defamatory comments via a bandwagon effect." LT

• Cover
• Charter Rights
• Dodging A Bullet
• Focus On Family Law