Big Victory For America’s Sick, Injured and Disabled Workers? And What’s The Cost?

2011-03-22T14:15:00.001-07:00

del.icio.us Tags: Greg Casamento,Paul Van Slyke,Locke Lord Bissell,SLAPP,9th circuit court of appeals,Sedgwick Claims Management Services,Sedgwick CMS,David North,Bellevue IA,Gregory Casamento

The purpose of this blog is to express the ideas and opinions of its author relating to a lawsuit filed on behalf of Sedgwick Claims Management Services. It is my sincere desire that you and your colleagues will send a message to these characters and express your sincere disapproval of their actions and methods. If you are a thoughtful consumer of legal services, find another firm.

In wonderfully eclectic cities such as San Francisco and New York, the free speech and expression of ideas across all spectrums of the populations must be protected! How could these lads have got it so wrong? Please take the time to read on.

Locke Lord Bissell & Liddell LLP New York, Houston, Texas

Three of the key players in this obnoxious litigation are my three friends pictured below

Locke Lord’s Deputy Internet “Lawman”

Greg Casamento

Locke Lord’s Top Internet “Lawman”

Paul Van Slyke

Locke Lord’s Junior Internet “Lawman”

R. James De Rose, III

IceRocket Tags: Locke Lord Bissell Liddell,Greg Casamento,Paul Van Slyke,Jimmy De Rose III,Torture,Terror,Intimidation,SLAPP,9th circuit court of appeals,destruction of american,Rob Delsman families,Gregory Casamento

I must say that Greg, Paul and Jimmy pursued their work with much vigor, after all, A SLAPP lawsuit can be tricky business. Brutally stomping on the Civil Rights and Human Rights of disabled individuals calls for careful preparation, intimidation and the tenacity to burst forward in the face of losing odds. And the boys did just that. They Lost!

The first blow came when the United States District Court for the Northern District of California told the lads to “take a hike” in Re:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No. C 09-1468 HRL
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
TRESPASS TO CHATTELS; COPYRIGHT
INFRINGEMENT; INTERFERENCE
WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC
ADVANTAGE; TRADE LIBEL;
DEFAMATION AND LIBEL; AND
UNFAIR COMPETITION

(Click on the image below linking to Citizens Media Law Project)

US District Court Judge Sandra Brown Armstrong, correctly, threw out most of the lawsuit as being a SLAPP and tossed out the ridiculous "copyright infringement" claim on the use of the photos, noting that it was certainly a case of fair use. Most impressive? The guy fighting Sedgwick and its big law firm won the case defending himself (pro se). (Tecdirt excerpt.)

And of course my friends, that should have ended the entire escapade, but not to be. I can only speculate on the motivation that propelled the lads incessantly forward; greed, the desire to kick some cripple’s ass, being pissed at losing, or maybe simple overzealousness in the application of the “Law”. Regardless of the reason, the lads decided to file an appeal on behalf of their despicable client, Sedgwick Claims Management Services to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Case No. 09-16809
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Appeal from the
U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California
(No. 4:09-cv-01468-SBA)

(Click on the image below linking to Citizens Media Law Project)

Round two came as no surprise, simply because of the despicable nature of their client. For the past three years, I had been recovering from major thoracic surgery and at this point had returned to work only a few months earlier. I was still a very sick boy.

Almost immediately after the lads filed their appeal, legal scholars began buzzing on the internet with comments akin to:

“Remember that discussion a few months ago about how most lawyers apparently understood the Streisand Effect, and knew better than to file bogus lawsuits against individuals putting up "gripes" sites about their business? We've already seen that's not quite true, but it takes a special level of thoughtlessness to lose such a bogus lawsuit (badly) and then file an appeal. (Techdirt)

“Put this one in the "Are you kidding me?" file. Last month I blogged about Sedgwick Claims Management v. Delsman involving a small-time griper who had the temerity to cut-and-paste some company executive headshots to create his griping material. Sedgwick went after Delsman in a big way, hiring a big national firm (Lord Locke) to take Delsman down, apparently unaware of or unconcerned about the Streisand effect. Delsman defended pro se. Despite the long odds, Delsman nevertheless got a rousing dismissal of the claims. The court held the use of the headshots was a fair use (a clearly correct ruling, IMO), and the court casually tossed all of the other claims using California's anti-SLAPP law. (Eric Goldman Associate Professor of Law at Santa Clara University School.)

Shortly after the lads filed the appeal I was very fortunate to be contacted by Paul Alan Levy from the Public Citizen Litigation Group in Washington DC. Public Citizen and Mr. Levy agreed to represent me pro bono on the appeal in the 9th Circuit. Things were looking up! Mr. Levy and Mr. Nelson did a terrific job at preparing my reply brief and then the waiting game started. It took some time (over a year as I recall) and on March 21, 2011 the word came down from the 9th. Lower Court Decision AFFIRMED. The lads had lost again!

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Saundra Brown Armstrong, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 8, 2011**
Before: FARRIS, O’SCANNLAIN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges

(Click on the image below to linking to Scribd)

“The Ninth Circuit gave Sedgwick a cool reception. In an unpublished 2 page memorandum opinion issued without oral argument, the court breezily told Sedgwick to buzz off. The entire substance of the ruling:

The district court properly dismissed Sedgwick’s defamation and trade libel claims under California’s anti-SLAPP statute because defendant Delsman’s conduct was in furtherance of his free speech rights in connection with an issue of public interest, and Sedgwick did not meet its burden of establishing a probability of prevailing on its claims. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 425.16; Ruiz v. Harbor View Cmty. Ass’n, 37 Cal. Rptr. 3d 133, 140-46 (Ct. App. 2005) (setting forth § 425.16 analysis, and concluding that defendant’s letter containing rhetorical hyperbole was free speech in connection with an issue of public interest and that plaintiff did not establish a probability of prevailing on his libel claim).

The court's final words are: "Sedgwick’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive." It would be hard for the Ninth Circuit to make their lack of interest in Sedgwick's appeal any clearer.” (Eric Goldman Associate Professor of Law at Santa Clara University School.)

Or, was all of this related to something entirely different? You Decide.

In closing, I hope that Greg, Paul and Jimmy are very proud of their work. During our brief interaction I nearly died due to the stress of all this BS, I lost nearly 70 pounds, tried to comfort my wife when she cried, told my children not to worry when we lost our house and felt a complete failure as a father when friends and neighbors had to bring us food to eat. Maybe next time you boys are sitting around yucking it up with your lawyer buds, you can tell the story of how you almost destroyed the Delsman family. Watch out for that karmic Boomerang..

BuzzNet Tags: Gregory Casamneto,Locke Lord Bissell,Paul Van Slyke,SLAPP,9th Circuit Court of appeals,Rob Delsman,Harvey Siskind,Locke Lord Losers