Thanksgiving Tom

Trustee Tom Fuentes is not happy

Carol Sobel on the case (but the 1st Amendment takes a hit)

“You don’t like to be told you are a fascist or a racist or a sexist, but those are statements of opinion . . . This case is an attempt by a large corporation to silence a small group of former employees and their advocate.”

     —Nativo Lopez attorney, Carol Sobel*

From Split decision in Overhill Farms case has chilling free-speech implications, dissenting justice asserts, OC Weekly/Moxley Confidential

     The third justice on the panel, Richard D. Fybel, dissented.
     “My colleagues in the majority have incorrectly made this court the first state or federal appellate court in America, ever, to hold that the epithet ‘racist’ constitutes a provably false assertion of fact as the basis of a claim of defamation,” wrote Fybel. “The employees’ claims might not be persuasive . . . that does not make them defamatory.”
     Fybel suggested the First Amendment had been weakened: “To illustrate this point, would it be actionable if the Los Angeles Times, the Orange County Register, Fox News or MSNBCcomplained that the actions by anyone were ‘racist’ or ‘discriminatory’? Of course not. Employees complaining about their employer enjoy the same protection.”

*Carol Sobel has served as the 1st Amendment attorney in a several successful lawsuits against our district.