The Lawsuits Thread

[ForeverYoung]

Yes, maybe it's just me and the angle of the cameras because the guy leaving the elevator does look like Musk and it is the same clothes.

[RumLover]

In the deposition of Alejandro Romeo, front desk staff at Eastern Columbia Building , he said
"Well, she used to call me telling me her friend was coming and to give him access to the garage and into the building and send him up to the penthouse. And then after probably a couple of visits, Amber provided with a garage remote and a fob."
Musk could have let himself in and out of the building so Amber accompanying him in the elevator is extra service.

I do think it is Elon and Amber in the video. But if Musk denied it was him, then that would not help Amber as it would imply there was one more male visitor.

[Lbock]

VA is a go! Demurrer over ruled on three of four points. Plea in bar on time denied

No comment from Adam yet.
https://variety.com/2020/biz/news/johnn ... 203547471/

Johnny Depp Allowed to Pursue Defamation Suit Against Amber Heard
Gene Maddaus
March 27, 2020 1:27PM PDT

A Virginia judge on Friday refused to dismiss Johnny Depp’s lawsuit against Amber Heard, allowing him to proceed with a claim that she defamed him in a Washington Post opinion piece.

In the piece, published in December 2018, Heard alluded to her previous claims that Depp had assaulted her during their marriage, though she did not identify him by name.

Judge Bruce D. White ruled on Friday that Depp can proceed under the theory that Heard’s statements clearly implied that Depp had assaulted her.

“Plaintiff has pleaded circumstances that would reasonably cause three of the four statements at issue to convey the alleged defamatory meaning that Mr. Depp abused Ms. Heard, and this alleged meaning is in fact defamatory,” White wrote.

Depp filed the $50 million suit in March 2019, taking issue with the headline of the piece and several statements within it that implied he was an abuser.

The headline was: “Amber Heard: I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change.”

In the body of the column, she wrote: “Then two years ago, I became a public figure representing domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture’s wrath for women who speak out.” She also wrote: “I had the rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.”

Heard first accused Depp of abusing her in 2016, in the context of their divorce. Depp has said throughout that the allegations are false, and are a hoax conjured to help Heard’s career.

Heard’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, urged the court last fall to throw out the suit, arguing that the column was fundamentally not about Heard’s allegations against Depp.

“It was about her and what happened to her after she came forward,” Kaplan argued.

White rejected that argument, finding that the column “relied on the factual underpinning that Ms. Heard was abused by Mr. Depp.”

White did throw out Depp’s defamation claim with regard to a fourth statement in the piece. In that statement, she wrote about receiving death threats, and being followed by paparazzi on the rare occasions when she left her home.

“I felt as though I was on trial in the court of public opinion — and my life and livelihood depended on myriad judgments far beyond my control,” she wrote.

White held that the statement carried no defamatory implication against Depp. White also rejected Heard’s attorneys’ claim that the suit was barred by the one-year statute of limitations, because Heard was merely alluding to statements that had first been made in 2016.

Heard’s attorneys have said that if necessary, they intend to show that she was, in fact, abused.

“Today’s decision leaves it to a jury to decide the meaning of Ms. Heard’s op-ed and the truth of what she said,” Kaplan said Friday. “As we have said all along, the courts have strong mechanisms in place for determining the truth. Here, we remain confident that Ms. Heard will prevail at trial when the jury is presented with evidence on the question that the Court identified – namely, whether ‘Ms. Heard was abused by Mr. Depp.'”

Adam Waldman, one of Depp’s attorneys, responded that the ruling speaks for itself.

“Roberta Kaplan’s suggestion that losing their own motion to dismiss was what they had planned all along also speaks for itself,” he said. “As for Amber Heard’s mythical ‘evidence’ that Ms. Kaplan confidently cites, we and reality both look forward to seeing it.”

[Lbock]

Judges opinion letter from court site
https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/s ... 7-2020.pdf

[Judymac]

Judges opinion letter from court site
https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/s ... 7-2020.pdf

Thanks Lbock

[Judymac]

Yes, maybe it's just me and the angle of the cameras because the guy leaving the elevator does look like Musk and it is the same clothes.

I definitely think that it it Amber and Elon in the elevator.

[Larkwoodgirl]

Halleluah. Now the case can move forward before a jury. The screws have tightened.

[Lbock]

[Lbock]

THR

‪In evaluating such claims, White draws all fair inferences in Depp's favor and considers evidence that has been presented to provide context, specifically events surrounding their divorce.‬

Because truth is an absolute defense to defamation claims, things will likely get ugly and personal as this case moves toward trial — with each sight fighting to prove the other was abusive — as they have in Depp's U.K. fight with The Sun. (That trial is currently on hold because of the coronavirus pandemic.)

Waldman

Depp's attorney Adam Waldman also sent THR a statement: "Today’s Court ruling speaks for itself. Roberta Kaplan’s suggestion that losing their own motion to dismiss was what they had planned all along also speaks for itself. As for Amber Heard’s mythical ‘evidence’ that Ms. Kaplan confidently cites, we and reality both look forward to seeing it."

[ForeverYoung]

Oh, this is good. Let's see now if she actually files an answer to his complaint where she has to admit and deny the counts. If she files another request, I don't think the judge is going to like it.

[Lbock]

I’m not sure why she held this back. Maybe hoping for the new VA anti-SLAPP bill (which I think is stalled from virus. But that is supposed to be filed early before major discovery)

Footnote page 2

At the plea in bar portion of the hearing, Ms. Heard reserved her arguments that (1) she is entitled to immunity under Virginia's Anti-SLAPP statute and (2) that she cannot be liable for the online article's title for a later evidentiary hearing.

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/s ... 7-2020.pdf

[stroch]

I am so sick of the lying, evading, counter-measures, half-truths and slimy manipulations, not just in this case, but across the world we live in today. One of the things my father taught me through his behavior and attitudes is to own your own actions. If you did something, whatever consequences come your way are a result of your own actions, and you have to accept it.

Sorry for the rant; I could go on for paragraphs. Enough, already. Grow some and get on with life.

[justintime]

VA is a go! Demurrer over ruled on three of four points. Plea in bar on time denied.

Judges opinion letter from court site
https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/s ... 7-2020.pdf

Just saw this. Thanks so much, Lbock, for your unrelenting vigilance.

Hope Johnny is well and this news brightened his day a bit.

[Judymac]

I’m not sure why she held this back. Maybe hoping for the new VA anti-SLAPP bill (which I think is stalled from virus. But that is supposed to be filed early before major discovery)

Footnote page 2

At the plea in bar portion of the hearing, Ms. Heard reserved her arguments that (1) she is entitled to immunity under Virginia's Anti-SLAPP statute and (2) that she cannot be liable for the online article's title for a later evidentiary hearing.

https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/s ... 7-2020.pdf

I am not sure if the Anti Slapp legislation would apply to this case, even if it is voted into law in VA. The case was filed before the legislation existed. I do not think that the law can be applied retroactively. This would be decided by a judge. I think this case has an excellent judge. He is not swayed by Amber Heard's nonsense. Amber and her attorney's are putting all of their efforts into getting the case thrown out. They are faced with the overwhelming evidence that Amber Heard is an abuser and a liar. They are desperate to get this case thrown out. It is hilarious that Roberta Kaplan keeps insisting that they want the truth to come out but she keeps trying to get the case dismissed. She must be as arrogant as Amber Heard if she thinks that people can not see right though her phony tactics.

[Lbock]

They were asking for legal fees too for the demurrer/plea in bar

I’m disappointed the judge didn’t award any to Johnny