Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "



http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/202704/



Duluth News Tribune

Christa Lawler

June 14, 2011



A Duluth physician whose defamation suit against a former patient’s son was thrown out of district court said he has no choice but to file an appeal.



Dr. David McKee, a neurologist with Northland Neurology and Myology, said he is still being targeted in online attacks related to the lawsuit he filed in June 2010 against Dennis Laurion. McKee, who treated Laurion’s father after he suffered a hemorrhagic stroke, alleges that Laurion made false statements about him to neurological associations, other physicians, St. Luke’s Hospital and the St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services Advisory Committee, among others. He is seeking more than $50,000 in damages.



McKee said a sudden concentration of unfavorable critiques about him cropped up online before Sixth District Judge Eric Hylden dismissed the suit. “It appears that Mr. Laurion made over 100 adverse postings on the Internet once he became aware that he was going to receive a favorable decision on the motion for summary judgment,” McKee said. “Appealing seems to me the only way to curb the activities of this malicious person.”



Laurion said he has not posted anything on the Internet about McKee since the lawsuit was filed last June. He said his lawyer advised him not to. But, because the case was thrown out, technically he could if he wanted to, he said.



Laurion said he was aware there was an influx of Internet chatter about McKee after a link to a story about McKee appeared on the high-traffic website reddit.com.



Marshall Tanick, the Minneapolis lawyer who is representing McKee, said the appellate court will have a hearing before a three-judge panel in the fall or later this year. “



(McKee) believes the trial judge erred in dismissing the lawsuit,” Tanick said. “He is asking the appellate court to reverse the decision and reinstate the case so that he has his day in court before a jury.”



Kenneth Laurion spent four days at St. Luke’s hospital in April 2010. John Kelly, Dennis Laurion’s lawyer, told the News Tribune last summer they didn’t feel McKee acted appropriately toward their father, and they reported it to the hospital and Board of Medical Practice. Hylden wrote in his 18-page order dismissing the suit that the court did not find Laurion’s statements about McKee defamatory, “but rather a sometimes emotional discussion of the issues.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Anonymous:



Thank you very much for contacting CyberSmokeBlog to update us on an important case we haven't been tracking closely since a lower court decision was handed down a few months ago. Upon reading the Duluth News Tribune report here's what jumped out for us:



(1) Use of the term, "it appears" by Dr. McKee in the Duluth News Tribune (paragraph 3) alleging Dennis Laurion was responsible for over 100 internet postings once he (Mr. Laurion) became aware a motion for a summary dismissal of the lawsuit against him would go in his favour. It seems to us a much higher evidentiary standard will be required



(2) Mr. Laurion's denial (paragraph 4)



(3) A successful appeal and possible trial will only bring more attention to this case. We all know how easily a story can go viral on the internet



(4) Has this case the potential of becoming another SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)?



(5) Who is/are the registered owner(s) of the site reddit.com?



(6) What is the liability of sites that host hyperlinks and vice versa?



We don't know the state of the law on issue (6) in the United States but here in Canada it's still before the courts. Read on.



Sincerely,

Clare L. Pieuk

__________________________________________________

Internet link case to go before Supreme Court

April 2, 2011

has left a new comment on your post " SLAPPs! Duluth News TribuneChrista LawlerJune 14, 2011A Duluth physician whose defamation suit against a former patient’s son was thrown out of district court said he has no choice but to file an appeal.Dr. David McKee, a neurologist with Northland Neurology and Myology, said he is still being targeted in online attacks related to the lawsuit he filed in June 2010 against Dennis Laurion. McKee, who treated Laurion’s father after he suffered a hemorrhagic stroke, alleges that Laurion made false statements about him to neurological associations, other physicians, St. Luke’s Hospital and the St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services Advisory Committee, among others. He is seeking more than $50,000 in damages.McKee said a sudden concentration of unfavorable critiques about him cropped up online before Sixth District Judge Eric Hylden dismissed the suit. “It appears that Mr. Laurion made over 100 adverse postings on the Internet once he became aware that he was going to receive a favorable decision on the motion for summary judgment,” McKee said. “Appealing seems to me the only way to curb the activities of this malicious person.”Laurion said he has not posted anything on the Internet about McKee since the lawsuit was filed last June. He said his lawyer advised him not to. But, because the case was thrown out, technically he could if he wanted to, he said.Laurion said he was aware there was an influx of Internet chatter about McKee after a link to a story about McKee appeared on the high-traffic website reddit.com.Marshall Tanick, the Minneapolis lawyer who is representing McKee, said the appellate court will have a hearing before a three-judge panel in the fall or later this year. “(McKee) believes the trial judge erred in dismissing the lawsuit,” Tanick said. “He is asking the appellate court to reverse the decision and reinstate the case so that he has his day in court before a jury.”Kenneth Laurion spent four days at St. Luke’s hospital in April 2010. John Kelly, Dennis Laurion’s lawyer, told the News Tribune last summer they didn’t feel McKee acted appropriately toward their father, and they reported it to the hospital and Board of Medical Practice. Hylden wrote in his 18-page order dismissing the suit that the court did not find Laurion’s statements about McKee defamatory, “but rather a sometimes emotional discussion of the issues.”------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DearThank you very much for contacting CyberSmokeBlog to update us on an important case we haven't been tracking closely since a lower court decision was handed down a few months ago. Upon reading the Duluth News Tribune report here's what jumped out for us:(1) Use of the term, "it appears" by Dr. McKee in the Duluth News Tribune (paragraph 3) alleging Dennis Laurion was responsible for over 100 internet postings once he (Mr. Laurion) became aware a motion for a summary dismissal of the lawsuit against him would go in his favour. It seems to us a much higher evidentiary standard will be required(2) Mr. Laurion's denial (paragraph 4)(3) A successful appeal and possible trial will only bring more attention to this case. We all know how easily a story can go viral on the internet(4) Has this case the potential of becoming another SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation)?(5) Who is/are the registered owner(s) of the site reddit.com?(6) What is the liability of sites that host hyperlinks and vice versa?We don't know the state of the law on issue (6) in the United States but here in Canada it's still before the courts. Read on.Sincerely,Clare L. Pieuk__________________________________________________April 2, 2011

Internet law specialists say everyone involved in a web publication will be watching the case closely. (CBC)

Is a Hyperlink Publication?

Can posting a link to someone else's website constitute defamation?An internet law specialist says it's an important case that everyone involved in the web will be watching closely.The top court on Thursday granted Wayne Crookes leave to appeal a British Columbia ruling that went against him in 2008.He had argued that when a Canadian website posted links to two U.S. websites that featured defamatory statements, it was the same as publishing defamatory material itself.The website did not reproduce any of the disputed material, nor did it make any comment.Justice Stephen Kelleher of the B.C. Supreme Court dismissed the case, saying the links were like a footnote or a reference to a website in a newsletter."I conclude there has been no publication," he wrote.Crookes had launched several libel actions against members of the Green Party of Canada, Google, Myspace.com and Wikipedia.David Fewer, director of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic at the University of Ottawa, said the lower courts got the decision right and there's concern about the high court taking the case."If they're doing it to give a pretty clear validation of the decision at trial and the court of appeal . . . kind of wanting to progress the law, then it's probably a good thing."But a decision overturning the lower courts in favour of Crookes could cast a chill on the web, he said."The Crookes case is really talking about hyperlinks," he said. "Does a hyperlink constitute publication or a re-publication of allegedly defamatory content?"Fewer said the internet is based on the use of hyperlinks."To import liability in those circumstances is to impose just a tremendous burden of liability on all participants in the internet," he said."Not just hosts, not just websites, not just bulletin boards, not just ISPs, but also individual participants, commenters on blogs, commenters in newspapers, newspapers themselves, other publishers who allow anybody to speak on the internet."You can just imagine the chilling effect that would have."