Law Student Message Board Saga Inevitably Culminates In Lawsuit
from the after-all-they're-lawyers dept
Over the past few months, there have been some stories about a message board for law students that some have blamed for costing them job offers. One female Yale law student says she interviewed with 16 firms, and didn't receive a single offer, pointing the finger at postings about her on the message board that were potentially defamatory or offensive. Now, that student and another female classmate have sued a former employee of the site, as well as several people who posted on the site under pseudonyms. Their suit claims they've suffered "substantial psychological and economic injury" from the messages, and asks for $245,400 in punitive damages plus other unspecified damages. It's nice to see the suit going after the posters, rather than the site itself, since that's how the law is supposed to work. Still, without wanting to downplay the nasty nature of many of these comments, it seems like there's plenty of overreaction to go around here. Again, it seems rather unlikely that so many firms would pass over such a supposedly promising student based solely on these message threads, which they may or may not have seen. Furthermore, the fact that one of the Jane Does apparently hired a company to "defend her reputation" online -- which apparently charges a separate fee per item they get taken offline -- appears to have encouraged the juvenile morons attacking her to only step things up. It's also not particularly clear what this case will help accomplish, apart from a potentially chilling effect on law-student speech. Winning the case, and $250,000 or more in damages, won't put the cat back in the bag, and if the students think the messages kept them from getting jobs, what will be the effect of the inevitable stories about the suit that turn up in Google searches?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Are you crazy? Leave a comment?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Are you crazy? Leave a comment?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Work with the entertainment industry?
They are showing how good they are at gttitng a posting taken down and hammering the defendant for every penny they can screw out of them. THis would count as far more than a good refernce to the MAFIAA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
At least
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You agree not to act like a lawyer when you see something here that may be personally disparaging. Let's devise win-win scenarios and work out our differences in a spirit of mutual cooperation and trust, or better yet, overlook trivial slights so we can embrace the possibilities of each God-given day.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just a Crazy Canuck's thoughts Eh!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just a Crazy Canuck's thoughts Eh!
Oh yeah -- these are the places she wants to work.
Anyone know the general substance of the comments? Were they anything actaully related to potential job performance?
If it was just that she is insufferably obnoxious and aggressive -- is that really derogatory for a lawyer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just a Crazy Canuck's thoughts Eh!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well...
Or perhaps they aren't that good so they were turned down.
But frankly if a potential employer bases their decision on what they find on the internet then I really have to wonder if they are a good employer. Even if they had hired them does this mean that they would continue to scour the net for dirty laundry and fire as soon as some came up?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well...
Lots of lawyers do not defend themselves in lawsuits.
I she hires another lawyer, then the publicity stunt was not thought out very well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What a stroke of pure genius - too bad it was just by accident.
But I would agree with Matthew above too. Question really is.... are the posts true :O
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
wow, shocking.
i am shocked and apalled that a lawyer would do such a thing. it's so out of character for people in that profession.
and choosing to sue another lawyer... that's even more surprising. i wonder if those other lawyers saw that coming... being that they were lawyers and all.
that's like black on black crime, except it's with lawyers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Could this spell doom for the legal profession?
I predict that the entire legal profession will implode in the next 5 years or so. Hopefully, by then, I will have made my fortune as a litigation-support specialist (IT, making copies, serving summons and subpoenas). No way am I going to become a lawyer. I could get sued, man.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reality-sitcom! Killer concept! Could be the next biggie.
Bonus!, the plot already makes more sense than "Lost"...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
More than meets the eye.
How about references? I'm sure they'd have got references from her professors, etc, and as an employer, I'd sure as hell value that 100x more than some anonymous post in a forum.
So if we interpret this right, this woman goes for job interviews with no references from her professors or mentors, somehow managed to get thrown out by Sixteen firms, hires a separate company to "defend her reputation" online by posting to msg boards, and sues the hell out of a bunch of anonymous posters? Wow.
Methinks the simpler explanation was that maybe she's a mean bitch?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]