War: ACORN sues Breitbart, O’Keefe, and Giles
posted at 6:33 pm on September 23, 2009 by Allahpundit
Amazing. In one fell swoop, the lawsuit (a) gives Fox a reason to keep covering the story, (b) presents a thorny legal issue that’ll attract media to the scandal who might not otherwise have touched it, and (c) makes ACORN look like they’re trying to punish people who exposed taxpayer-funded corruption. Which, of course, they are.
Remember, Bertha Lewis told CNN she was grateful to O’Keefe et al. for rooting out those “few bad apples,” but as the boss reminds us, shooting the messenger is the ACORN way. Here’s her gratitude:
ACORN, taking a break from its apology tour, said today that it’s filing suit against James O’Keefe, Hannah Giles and Andrew Breitbart’s Breitbart.com.
The complaint: “The video and audio footage was taken without the knowledge of Williams and/or Thompson and in violation of Maryland’s Courts and Judicial Proceedings Code §§ 10-402(a) and 10-410, which requires two party consent to all electronic surveillance. Violation of the law is a felony, and entitles parties whose rights were violated to sue.”
No word on the damages they’re seeking but the AP says it’s in the multi-millions. Ken Blackwell wrote an op-ed for Politico over the weekend speculating that ACORN would never sue for the simple reason that pre-trial discovery would turn into a treasure hunt for Breitbart. Minor detail, though: Blackwell assumed they’d be suing for defamation, not wiretapping. Any litigators want to weigh in on what the defense is entitled to demand for a suit on the narrow question of whether ACORN had consented to being videotaped?
My guess is that this is just an arm of their new PR offensive, aimed at proving that the group’s still alive and kicking and ready to rally the left to its side before it gets defunded, but if even Barney Frank’s ready to flush the toilet, the prognosis of success is grim. Stand by for defense fund donation information if/when Breitbart posts it.
Update: Belated exit prediction: 99 percent chance that ACORN quietly drops the suit a few weeks or months from, one percent chance that they go to trial and the jury awards them a dollar.










Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6
Will ACORN get SLAPP-ed ?
J_Crater on September 24, 2009 at 9:07 AM
ACORN and US Census still want to honor the contract labor?
maverick muse on September 24, 2009 at 9:08 AM
That is true. Maybe this trial will at least illustrate the stupidity of the left’s desire to bring terrorist cases into the civil courts; for the same reason.
MikeA on September 24, 2009 at 9:13 AM
Leon H. Wolf @ RedState
Worth repeating.
maverick muse on September 24, 2009 at 9:15 AM
I just realized something….Extortion is the name of Acorn’s game. This is what they did to the banks that refused to give loans to people that couldn’t afford them. They think they’ll be able to say “for a price, we can make this go away.”
A’int gonna happen!
njpat on September 24, 2009 at 9:15 AM
We should Alinsky them….protest at their offices, just like they did to the banks.
njpat on September 24, 2009 at 9:19 AM
This will be A Good War.
I promise.
t.ferg on September 24, 2009 at 9:20 AM
So,,basically, ACORN is saying that it doesn’t matter if they’re law-breaking scum. It’s the fact that they were caught on video being law-breaking scum that is the problem. And now, through this Maryland law, they’re trying to put the cat back in the bag. Ain’t gonna happen.
kingsjester on September 24, 2009 at 9:25 AM
This will all be studied in journalism schools for 100 years. I mean, if there still are any journalism schools around then. If so they’ll just be teaching how to use blogware.
Akzed on September 24, 2009 at 9:32 AM
I think it is great that they are suing! Hopefully the discovery process will include a walk through the books of ACORN which would be fabulous.
smrtas1 on September 24, 2009 at 9:32 AM
I am curious about the rules of discovery in a limited case like this. Since they’re only suing for the illegal recording, I am not clear that there will be any actual digging into books or records. How does that work>?
WashingtonsWake on September 24, 2009 at 9:40 AM
For one thing, ACORN is named as a plantiff and will have to show standing as such. And for another thing, ACORN is not incorporated in MD, which means discovery will be allowed to determine just who and what ACORN is that it can bring a suit in that state.
MikeA on September 24, 2009 at 9:46 AM
Laws are different in every State. For example, in Virginia, I can record any conversation I am a party to. The Socialist State of Mary-land has a two-party consent law. How this applies to security cameras, I don’t know.
riverrat10k on September 24, 2009 at 9:46 AM
I suspect a good attorney could find any number of legitimate counterclaims to file (SLAPP, whistleblower, etc)
Be that as it may, if Defendants do file a counterclaim, they can still go forward with the counterclaim even if Plaintiff(ACORN) were to dismiss its original Complaint.
As a consequence, ACORN might really have grabbed a tiger by the tail, because it no longer “controls” whether this lawsuit goes to trial or not.
alwyr on September 24, 2009 at 9:57 AM
AB: Is ACORN networked into prison populations? Show us what that looks like.
petefrt on September 24, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Where are the Maryland lawyers who can give us advice on Maryland law?
The scope of discovery is anything relevant to the claim or anything which might lead to evidence relevant to the claim. Rule 2-402(a), Maryland Rules of Civil Procedure for the Circuit Court. Rule 26(b)(1)(A), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Breitbart, O’Keefe and Giles can file counterclaims which can greatly increase the scope of discovery.
Since the discussions were with O’Keefe and Giles, plaintiffs have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Thompson and Williams have potential claims against ACORN. These attorneys cannot represent all 3 plaintiffs unless the attorneys have fully disclosed the conflicts and the plaintiffs waive the conflicts.
Are there First Amendment, journalist, whistleblower, or other defenses to the civil claims under the Maryland wiretap law?
slp on September 24, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Do these two really make us Conservatives look good? I mean, come on people, they dressed as a pimp and a whore! In keeping with tradition here, I think it is best to trash these too for not conforming to suit and tie, straight laced, unremarkable brand of Conservatism. They embarrass me.
<\thick sarcasm>
Bleed_thelizard on September 24, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Frankly, if Mark Levin, Landmark Legal, Heritage and 10,000 conservative attorneys from around the country don’t come to their aide, they are bums.
Show me the link for the Legal Defense Fund and I am IN.
Each of the 10,000 attorneys should write a discovery query or two. When ACORN is hit with 10,000 breifs and would need to hire 10,000 attorneys (like the President was) to defend the suit, it would be dropped.
Of course, it may be better to have 10 attorneys and actually have discovery.
Either way, give me the link for the $$$. And if not for legal defense, then to give them a grant for their next project (and maybe to buy that poor girl some clothes that will keep her warm in the winter.)
barnone on September 24, 2009 at 10:28 AM
Could Giles and O’Keeffe counter sue for defamation? Wouldn’t that kick in the lenient discovery?
petunia on September 24, 2009 at 10:34 AM
They will go to court. Baltimore is the birthplace of the stop snitching, and libs rule the town.
Laura in Maryland on September 24, 2009 at 10:35 AM
s/b Stop Snitching videos
Laura in Maryland on September 24, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Mega-dittos. Me too.
petefrt on September 24, 2009 at 10:36 AM
Every single story I have seen or read in the left-wing media has totally glossed over the smuggling and exploitation of the El Salvadoran girls… they say prostitutes and pimp but not the child sex slavery. They are actually controlling that message pretty well I think.
petunia on September 24, 2009 at 10:44 AM
Isn’t the main purpose of a free press to keep watch on government? And since Acorn is an organization assisting with government programs, the benefit of public exposure exceeds the lawbreakers right to provacy.
happy2behere on September 24, 2009 at 10:55 AM
No. In a common area, maybe. But in a back office or conference room there is an expectation of privacy. Arguing that because they were a business they therefore had no expectation of privacy is silly. Don’t throw common sense out the window.
Blake on September 24, 2009 at 10:56 AM
I think it has to do with their claim for damages which should allow a search to determine what those were. And, as pointed out above, a counterclaim would also play into it.
a capella on September 24, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Oh, and in Malpas the court found no expectation of privacy when the guy was shouting so loud into a phone that his neighbor could not only hear him but record it. Read cases before relying on them.
Blake on September 24, 2009 at 11:04 AM
Yes, I also noticed that. They especially want that swept under the rug, but replaying those videos repeatedly in a court setting takes that away.
a capella on September 24, 2009 at 11:05 AM
I have already decided that neither I nor my family
will even TALK to any acorn worker.
I didnt vote for them
I dont think they are remotely honest
I think they are a criminal organization
I will NOT talk to them nor give any acorn worker
any informatin.
So go ahead send the census workers to my door
i will SLAM it in their face..
and if they sue
I will tell them my true name and address
JUAN from mexico..
Enjoy..
veteranoutrage on September 24, 2009 at 11:10 AM
Since the discussions were with O’Keefe and Giles, plaintiffs had no reasonable expectation of privacy. Plaintiffs had no reasonable expectation that O’Keefe and Giles could not go on television or radio and repeat everything that plaintiffs said.
To quote Leon H. Wolf: “As a matter of law, the employees at ACORN had no reasonable expectation of privacy in what they said to members of the public who entered their offices.”
http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2009/09/23/watch-me-get-the-acorn-lawsuit-dismissed-in-15-minutes-or-less/
slp on September 24, 2009 at 11:16 AM
Maryland has a law like that?
You would almost think it was specifically designed by corrupt politicians to prevent muckraking. It almost deliberately sets up a “my word against yours” situation for anything.
Count to 10 on September 24, 2009 at 11:21 AM
this is great, time to remove the skeletons from the closet.
la.rt.wngr on September 24, 2009 at 11:22 AM
Also, what damages?
Legally speaking, these two should be payed by ACORN for uncovering illegal behavior by ACORN employees. Any losses ACORN is taking right now are because of own their negligence in hiring and training practices (at absolute best), a fact which has only been brought to popular attention by the tapes.
Count to 10 on September 24, 2009 at 11:27 AM
Maryland is the most corrupt state in the US. Everyone in Maryland works for ACORN, including ALL of the judges.
The laws in Maryland have been established for no other purpose than to protect the type of corruption that ACORN and the Democrats engage in from being detected.
ACORN will prevail in Maryland. They will collect from the defendants all the money that they lost as a result of the illegal recording. After all, in Maryland, the Law is the Law.
jay12 on September 24, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Oh Please don’t drop the suit, Please don’t drop the suit….The Discovery alone would be worth they lawyer fees although I do think they could get some high profile lawyers to defend them pro bono. This Lawsuit would be 24/7 cable news porn.
Dr Evil on September 24, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Yeah, but the suit was filed out of the national headquarters in New Orleans and if it gets moved to federal court, discovery is still a potent weapon. This really isn’t about that silly recording issue,…I’m hoping the defendants will use the fact that ACORN doesn’t exist in MD as a way to dig into the whole organization. I suppose if MD judges put a gag rule on any discovery findings it would be a downer. I really don’t know how these things work.
a capella on September 24, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Uh, no. In fact, I had initially posted that this was one of the dumbest arguments that I have heard in a long while but edited it out because I thought I was too mean. Obviously, not.
He says “as a matter of law”. So, where is the law? The cases he cites, if you or he had actually read them, do not apply – not even close.
Blake on September 24, 2009 at 12:02 PM
So let me see if I have this straight…
A corporation that is not recognized in good standing and is operating illegally in the state of Maryland is going to file a lawsuit in Maryland?
That ought to be fun…
Where do I donate to the the Breitbart/O’ Keefe/Giles defense fund?
JohnBG on September 24, 2009 at 12:15 PM
The very second the judges show any bias in favor of Acorn, we need to get down there with a couple of thousand people and remind them that they took an oath to the constitution.
Hey, come to think of it, didn’t acorn arrange for picketing of executive’s homes??? Perhaps a conservative group could start dropping busloads of people in front of the judges homes if they show any bias.
bullseye on September 24, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Open Season on Acorn’s books, wait til the counter suit hits, I want to hear the Obama Acorn Training tapes!!!!
UNREPENTANT CONSERVATIVE CAPITOLIST on September 24, 2009 at 12:23 PM
If ACORN is successful with their suit and gets a million dollars, that ought to be almost enough to reimburse them for the amount that Dale Rathke embezzled from them. ;-P
JohnBG on September 24, 2009 at 12:39 PM
Let’s keep it going through 2010. Let’s keep it on Fox every day of discovery. Oh, this is delicious.
Bambi on September 24, 2009 at 12:42 PM
Don’t underestimate the Left’s ability to crush their critics.
Skipper50 on September 24, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Employees talking to each other in an office which is enclosed and not open to the public have been held to have an expectation of privacy (when they were recorded by their employer or someone else placing a hidden recording device in the office). I don’t think that rule would apply to employees talking to members of the public who have walked into the office, which is open to the public, and in fact is there to serve the public. I don’t know if that exact situation has been addressed, haven’t seen any cases on it.
mbs on September 24, 2009 at 12:57 PM
I’m hoping the corporate veil gets PIERCED and Breitbart, O’Keefe, and Giles can go after the Board and Officers PERSONALLY in a counter filing or even criminal charges for fraud and conspiracy like RICO.
Blacksmith8 on September 24, 2009 at 1:01 PM
Even the limited liability theories posed in ACORN’s Maryland complaint open up its training establishment to discovery. The possible defenses include obtaining evidence of a criminal conspiracy to violate the many exceptions described in section 10-402, and the fact that other ACORN offices fell for the same inherently unbelievable impersonation indicates a common scheme or design in the training of ACORN staff.
Tom_Holsinger on September 24, 2009 at 2:04 PM
right2bright on September 24, 2009 at 2:45 PM
That’s an invasion of privacy case, but the expectation of privacy standard applicable to Maryland’s Wiretap law is similar.
mbs on September 24, 2009 at 2:46 PM
That would be the Linda Trip who refused to lie under oath, thus helping to impeach Clinton? Yes?
That would be the Linda Trip that sued the Department of Defense and the Justice Department for releasing information from her security file and employment file to the news media in violation of the Privacy Act of 1974?
The Clinton Admin illegally leaked her employment file?
“O
Wow! do you remember Linda Tripp?
The Linda Trip that 49 Democrats in the Maryland Legislature signed a letter to the state prosecutor demanding that Tripp be prosecuted, she was charged by state authorities with violating Maryland’s wiretap law.
The case was thrown out for various reasons, one of which, the Star witness Lewinsky, was an admitted liar and not credible as a witness.
Is the entire ACORN organization ready to be examined to find out if they (ALL of THEM) are credible?
Do the trolls that post “remember Linda Tripp?” actually remember Linda Tripp?
DSchoen on September 24, 2009 at 4:19 PM
Oh no say it ain’t so. I was so looking forward to the media circus.
http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2009/09/23/watch-me-get-the-acorn-lawsuit-dismissed-in-15-minutes-or-less/
Dr Evil on September 24, 2009 at 4:54 PM
LegendHasIt
I read that law end to end, perhaps I missed it but can you point out what section, clause whatever that it is NOT about “Intercepted Interceptions, Intercepts” communications?
Nothing in these tapes were “Intercepted Interceptions, Intercepts” communications. They were direct 2 party conversations. Nothing was “Intercepted”, as that would require a 3rd party.
Would it be illegal to wear a “hidden camera” and “microphone” while inside the DMV?
If not why not
If yes please explain?
DSchoen on September 24, 2009 at 5:19 PM
Anyone enjoy watching “To Catch a Predator” on MSNBC? I wonder if they have ever filmed their stings in Maryland? Anyone know?
Red State State of Mind on September 24, 2009 at 6:36 PM
You are amking some great points and raising some excellent questions. I’m hoping that some of the lawyers that post here on HA will weigh in with their observations.
Personally, I’m not worried about O’Keefe and Giles actually being convicted because I don’t think there will be a criminal prosecution. ACORN’s civil suit, as many have noted, is very stupid of them to do as it opens them up to further scrutiny and keeps the story active in (some) media.
Red State State of Mind on September 24, 2009 at 6:41 PM
Did you see the video?
Did you notice the door was open and people were going in and out like it was a walk way.
Common sense tells us if the conversation is “privet” as in a business, the door is closed, people don’t go wandering through the room.
DSchoen on September 24, 2009 at 6:50 PM
WOOHOOO! Let the Subpoenas, Interrogatories, and Discovery on ACORN begin! This will be the biggest gift-horse that ACORN could ever give!
nelsonknows on September 24, 2009 at 8:12 PM
During discovery you can ask just about anything. Whomever is being deposed can “object”, it’ll be so noted, but the question should be answered. Admissability of something objected to will be determined during pretrial hearings)if memory serves), but what ever is discovered usually leads to more and better stuff. Been there, done that, and won.
Woody
woodcdi on September 24, 2009 at 10:02 PM
<blockquotewoodcdi on September 24, 2009 at 10:02 PM
Exactly, I won custody of my kids, Pro Se and accomplished most of it through discovery and subpoena. If you want to see a judges face turn red, nail him with his own court’s rules of discovery, WITHOUT having a JD and a BAR membership.
nelsonknows on September 25, 2009 at 1:14 AM
Bring it on ACORN! You’ll be in a constant state of litigation, because we are all Hannah, O’Neill and Breitbart. We are ALL watching you now! Hopefully you’ll collapse under the weight of legal fees, because Podesta looking into your doings is like having the fox watching the henhouse!
Dirtbags, one and all!
hopefloats on September 25, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Yes indeed Acorn, bring it on…. by the way, to the first deposition….please be so kind as to bring along with you the records on voter registration and salaries and perks to your executives AND most importantly any and all communications with anyone in the Obozo administration…. Just for starters. See you in court….
highninside on September 25, 2009 at 3:55 PM
The socialists are anti-First Amendment. Let them show their colors.
Phil Byler on September 25, 2009 at 10:19 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6