IBJNews

Appellate judges rule against Simon in defamation case

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A defamation lawsuit filed by Indiana Pacers owner Herb Simon and his wife against a California attorney looks as though it will be thrown out.

A panel of Indiana Court of Appeals judges on Wednesday reversed the decision of a Marion Superior Court judge that denied attorney Joseph Davis’ motion to dismiss the suit.

The lawsuit stems from comments Davis made to Indianapolis television station WTHR-TV Channel 13 regarding lawsuits involving the Simons, specifically one filed by a former nanny, whom Davis represented.

WTHR contacted Davis by phone for comment on the suit, in which he responded: “[T]he firing is because my client refused to engage in an unlawful, meaning a criminal, act pursuant to our immigration laws. ... This was all designed to conceal from local and state authorities the existence of this undocumented worker.”

A Los Angeles Superior Court judge tossed the lawsuit filed by the nanny, who claimed the Simons fired her because she became pregnant.

The Simons sued in Marion County for defamation based on Davis’ statements. Davis moved to dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction because Davis resides in California. Marion Superior Judge Heather Welch denied the motion.

On appeal, judges Elaine Brown and John Baker ruled in favor of Davis.

“Davis neither wrote nor disseminated the news story which is the object of the Simons’ defamation and false-light claim,” Brown wrote. “In short, the record does not reveal ‘purposeful conduct’ which was ‘intentionally directed at’ Indiana on the part of Davis to defame the Simons in Indiana, and accordingly Davis did not ‘expressly aim’ conduct at the State of Indiana.”

Judge James Kirsch dissented, writing that Davis engaged in intentional conduct in Indiana that was calculated to cause injury to the Simons in Indiana by “intentionally communicating defamatory statements … to a reporter for an Indianapolis television station.” He believed Davis’ conduct was “expressly aimed” at Indiana.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Illegals
    As I read through the article, it appears that some, not all, people do employ, or attempt to employ, illegal workers. I guess if you talk about it, you are at fault, not the person(s) doing the hiring. Numerous questions come to mind, such as taxes, social security withholding, worker compensation insurance, which would potentially send up a red flag for authorities.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
ADVERTISEMENT