ARTICLE
6 November 2019

Brian Radnoff Discusses Appropriate Usage Of Anti-SLAPP Legislation With Advocate Daily

DW
Dickinson Wright PLLC

Contributor

Dickinson Wright is a general practice business law firm with more than 475 attorneys among more than 40 practice areas and 16 industry groups. With 19 offices across the U.S. and in Toronto, we offer clients exceptional quality and client service, value for fees, industry expertise and business acumen.
Brian Radnoff (Partner, Toronto) recently spoke with Advocate Daily for an article titled "Anti-SLAPP legislation shouldn't be used in defamation case
United States Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Brian Radnoff (Partner, Toronto) recently spoke with Advocate Daily for an article titled “Anti-SLAPP legislation shouldn’t be used in defamation case.” The article analyzes a recent claim for $210 million in damages made against the CBC by a fast food chain. The claim is based on a report aired on consumer affairs program Marketplace, which claimed the chain’s chicken sandwiches were only 50% chicken, the rest being soy protein. Counsel for the CBC argued the lawsuit is an attempt to muzzle the CBC and should, therefore, be considered a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP).

“Why should we have legislation that permits this type of motion in these types of circumstances?” says Radnoff. “This was not the problem this legislation was designed to stop. The legislation is so broad that it applies in situations like this where the lawsuit is not going to silence the defendant.”

To read more, click here.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More