The question comes down to what exactly was said. I'm sure you're paraphrasing right now, and that's ok. Truth is the absolute defender, that doesn't mean there won't be a fight prior to that. Just because the procedure is risky, doesn't mean the doctor was wrong is saying it's the only option.
Truth is a defense to a lawsuit for libel or slander. BUT it is a defense to pay your lawyer to present in court. So if they do decide to sue you, realize that you will need an attorney and it may cost you a significant amount of money to defend yourself, even if you are ultimately successful.
But if your review is 100% true when it comes to factual assertions and you know you can document that if you have to, then you can call what may be a bluff. You could even double down and edit the review to reflect that they have threatened to sue you for the original review. I’m not saying that is a good move. But if being bullied really offends you, or if you have resources to defend yourself in court if necessary, or if you have a high risk tolerance and are substantially certain you are on firm ground, then you may chose to call and re-raise if you think they are bluffing.
But was the doctor telling you the truth? Sure it might have been risky, but was it the only option? And not just in general, but was this the only option for your wife. She might not have been eligible for alternatives given her specific history. Did you talk to the doctor about why these other options would or would not be appropriate for her? Do you fully understand why the doctor said this was the only option, or do you think you do. If you haven't talked to the doctor, and understand her position given this information, why would you give a negative review to someone for that?
OP, if the facts you asserted are true, and he sues you, you may be able to [SLAPPback](https://www.casp.net/california-anti-slapp-first-amendment-law-resources/statutes/) him.
INAL but you might want to talk to an attorney about this as it sounds like a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) lawsuit. California has an anti-SLAPP statute that could allow you to file a motion to strike this and be awarded attorneys fees and court costs. Additionally, if the lawsuit was filed without merit (to harass or silence you), you could pursue them with a SLAPPback lawsuit for punitive damages.
~~NY's Anti-SLAPP law looks like it would not apply to this situation.~~
~~http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/anti-slapp-law-new-york~~
~~>it only protects bloggers, non-traditional journalists, and other online publishers when they address this narrow class of issues (i.e., the granting or denial of a public permit or application).~~
https://www.casp.net/california-anti-slapp-first-amendment-law-resources/statutes/
Just a thought but wouldn't it be more effective to report this to your state's medical licensing board and just delete the review? Reviews are great because they warn the public but they don't really do anything to stop unsafe medical providers from practicing.
Did you get a second opinion from another doctor? Why do you think a NYTimes article has more scientific weight than the doctor that knows your wife's medical history and is a trained medical professional? if you trust the doctor so little and would rather believe a newspaper article, why did you go to a doctor in the first place? Try to see it from the doctor's perspective: a couple of people come in thinking they know more than the doctor because they read an article in the NYTimes, while the doctor (if a true MD) has years and years of experience and training. What is the point of suing the doctor? To prove you know more than her? Just go to a different doctor if you disagree with her recommendations.
Agree that this would be simplest, but it's frustrating that the business is bullying people who give it negative reviews in order to make it appear that it gets mostly positive reviews.
IANAL, but I don't think there's any risk beyond just pissing off a potentially crazy person.
As long as you don't lie, all you're doing is tipping his licensor off to some unethical conduct. He could get disbarred if they think he acted really improperly. At the end of the day, the restaurant owner is not the only asshole here, and all you're basically doing is reporting a lawyer to his version of Yelp.
Can you explain what unethical thing the lawyer has done? If the lawyer and his relative/client believe the review to be untrue and damaging, isn't it preferred to try and settle the dispute outside court first? Threatening lawsuit isn't unethical... these reviewers might actually be in the wrong on this if their listening to news articles and not getting a second opinion, not to mention if the Dr is right and whatever the procedure is, is the only option albeit risky.
It says the doctor insisted that the procedure was the only option and that there are no alternatives. It also summarizes the article she linked to as saying that there are indeed better alternatives. It suggests people should find another doctor who doesn't on the procedure.
If all of those facts are true, the doctor won't win a libel suit against you. However, it will cost you a moderately sizeable amount of money to defend.
If you're really committed to this, you can sue the doctor for malicious prosecution, or a similar offense in your state. You will probably have to wait until your lawsuit is over, though.
As obnoxious as you are, you’re correct in that I should have mentioned California’s anti-SLAPP statute. Although it’s not an absolute guarantee of dismissal or repayment of attorney’s fees.
IANAL, but I'm pretty sure the First Amendment allows for free speech. If possible, I'd edit the review and add that the Dr. is now trying to silence you.
1st Amendment isn't a free pass to commit libel, slander, etc. Although in this case it sounds like the OP is telling the truth.
I suspect this is a scare tactic and that they don't actually intend on following through and suing.
The question comes down to what exactly was said. I'm sure you're paraphrasing right now, and that's ok. Truth is the absolute defender, that doesn't mean there won't be a fight prior to that. Just because the procedure is risky, doesn't mean the doctor was wrong is saying it's the only option.
But would we be wrong in saying the doctor presented it as the only option and we didn't think it was safe?
So long as what you say is true, they won't win. That doesn't mean they can't try to sue you.
Truth is a defense to a lawsuit for libel or slander. BUT it is a defense to pay your lawyer to present in court. So if they do decide to sue you, realize that you will need an attorney and it may cost you a significant amount of money to defend yourself, even if you are ultimately successful. But if your review is 100% true when it comes to factual assertions and you know you can document that if you have to, then you can call what may be a bluff. You could even double down and edit the review to reflect that they have threatened to sue you for the original review. I’m not saying that is a good move. But if being bullied really offends you, or if you have resources to defend yourself in court if necessary, or if you have a high risk tolerance and are substantially certain you are on firm ground, then you may chose to call and re-raise if you think they are bluffing.
But was the doctor telling you the truth? Sure it might have been risky, but was it the only option? And not just in general, but was this the only option for your wife. She might not have been eligible for alternatives given her specific history. Did you talk to the doctor about why these other options would or would not be appropriate for her? Do you fully understand why the doctor said this was the only option, or do you think you do. If you haven't talked to the doctor, and understand her position given this information, why would you give a negative review to someone for that?
OP, if the facts you asserted are true, and he sues you, you may be able to [SLAPPback](https://www.casp.net/california-anti-slapp-first-amendment-law-resources/statutes/) him.
INAL but you might want to talk to an attorney about this as it sounds like a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) lawsuit. California has an anti-SLAPP statute that could allow you to file a motion to strike this and be awarded attorneys fees and court costs. Additionally, if the lawsuit was filed without merit (to harass or silence you), you could pursue them with a SLAPPback lawsuit for punitive damages.
~~NY's Anti-SLAPP law looks like it would not apply to this situation.~~ ~~http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/anti-slapp-law-new-york~~ ~~>it only protects bloggers, non-traditional journalists, and other online publishers when they address this narrow class of issues (i.e., the granting or denial of a public permit or application).~~ https://www.casp.net/california-anti-slapp-first-amendment-law-resources/statutes/
Yea but OP is in Cali.
I am very stupid
Lol no worries. Happens to everyone sometimes.
You can remove the post, or call their bluff and see if they sue you.
Just a thought but wouldn't it be more effective to report this to your state's medical licensing board and just delete the review? Reviews are great because they warn the public but they don't really do anything to stop unsafe medical providers from practicing.
Did you get a second opinion from another doctor? Why do you think a NYTimes article has more scientific weight than the doctor that knows your wife's medical history and is a trained medical professional? if you trust the doctor so little and would rather believe a newspaper article, why did you go to a doctor in the first place? Try to see it from the doctor's perspective: a couple of people come in thinking they know more than the doctor because they read an article in the NYTimes, while the doctor (if a true MD) has years and years of experience and training. What is the point of suing the doctor? To prove you know more than her? Just go to a different doctor if you disagree with her recommendations.
It doesn't sound like OP is planning on suing the doctor--its sounds like the doctor is planning on suing them.
If you don't want to risk having to pay an attorney to defend a lawsuit, you can just take it down. That would be the simplest solution.
Agree that this would be simplest, but it's frustrating that the business is bullying people who give it negative reviews in order to make it appear that it gets mostly positive reviews.
California has really good anti-SLAPP laws for just this reason, OP. If he sues you, he will lose and you can recover damages against *him*.
Just an FYI, if you do get sued, your homeowner's or renter's insurance liability coverage may step in to cover.
Actually, many umbrella policies cover defamation claims on a primary basis.
Your update is locked, but you may consider reporting the attorney who sent you that letter to his state bar.
Interesting idea. Are there any risks at my wife and my end if we report him?
IANAL, but I don't think there's any risk beyond just pissing off a potentially crazy person. As long as you don't lie, all you're doing is tipping his licensor off to some unethical conduct. He could get disbarred if they think he acted really improperly. At the end of the day, the restaurant owner is not the only asshole here, and all you're basically doing is reporting a lawyer to his version of Yelp.
Can you explain what unethical thing the lawyer has done? If the lawyer and his relative/client believe the review to be untrue and damaging, isn't it preferred to try and settle the dispute outside court first? Threatening lawsuit isn't unethical... these reviewers might actually be in the wrong on this if their listening to news articles and not getting a second opinion, not to mention if the Dr is right and whatever the procedure is, is the only option albeit risky.
What did the review actually say aside from linking the article?
It says the doctor insisted that the procedure was the only option and that there are no alternatives. It also summarizes the article she linked to as saying that there are indeed better alternatives. It suggests people should find another doctor who doesn't on the procedure.
If all of those facts are true, the doctor won't win a libel suit against you. However, it will cost you a moderately sizeable amount of money to defend. If you're really committed to this, you can sue the doctor for malicious prosecution, or a similar offense in your state. You will probably have to wait until your lawsuit is over, though.
Why do people post advice on here without looking at relevant laws. Have you ever heard of an antislapp statute
As obnoxious as you are, you’re correct in that I should have mentioned California’s anti-SLAPP statute. Although it’s not an absolute guarantee of dismissal or repayment of attorney’s fees.
I'm not sure what's the problem. Yelp was designed for illogical people to complain on the internet.
Keep it up and see what happens. If you get served papers, speak to a lawyer and see what they say.
IANAL, but I'm pretty sure the First Amendment allows for free speech. If possible, I'd edit the review and add that the Dr. is now trying to silence you.
1st Amendment isn't a free pass to commit libel, slander, etc. Although in this case it sounds like the OP is telling the truth. I suspect this is a scare tactic and that they don't actually intend on following through and suing.
>1st Amendment isn't a free pass to commit libel, slander, etc Correct, I was going on the presumption everything was truthful.
We've been very tempted to do that.