Judge Tosses Defamation Case Of The Sleepy Yankees Fan

from the zzzzzzzzz dept

Last year, we discussed the silly defamation case brought by Andrew Rector, baseball fan(?), that ESPN's cameras showed to be sleeping(!) at a Red Sox v. Yankees game. The commentators on ESPN had some fun at Andrew's expense. Quite mild and tame fun, it should be noted. But several websites picked up where they left off, and some comments left on those websites were less than friendly to Rector. For this, Rector filed a $10 million defamation suit against ESPN and the commentators, John Kruk and Dan Shulman. It looked bad on the basis of both the law, as well as the ability of whoever filed the suit to use a spellchecker and basic logic.

And now the courts have agreed, with a NYC judge dismissing the lawsuit.

While Rector’s lawsuit alleged that he was subjected to an “unending verbal crusade” by the ESPN duo, the assorted putdowns referred to in the complaint actually appeared in the comment sections of online articles about Rector nodding off during the game. Two comments cited in the lawsuit referred to Rector as a “fatty cow that needs two seats” and a “confused disgusted and socially bankrupt individual.”

In a decision issued last month, Judge Julia Rodriguez ruled that Shulman and Kruk made none of the nasty comments attributed to them in Rector’s complaint, adding that “none of the comments actually made by the announcers” was defamatory or false. Rodriguez added that, “At worst, the announcers’ comments might be considered to be loose, figurative or hyperbolic statements which are not actionable.”
Which, you know, duh. The idea that a person might snooze in a public venue where a telecast is occurring and then get upset because third parties saw footage of him sleeping is a logical bungle to begin with, but adding the money-grab feel of a multi-million dollar defamation suit against people who never said the things the suer is upset about represents such twisted brain-pretzels that it's actually hard for me to think about. Not every offense is actionable, after all, and the civil courts are not the place to rectify embarrassment in this way. The nature of the claim in Rector's original filing probably didn't help his cause, either.
Rector, a used car salesman, claimed in a court affidavit filed earlier this year that the ESPN broadcast--which he termed “bullying”--caused “enormous grief and embarrassment and affected my ability to work and go about my daily activity.” He added that, “people have avoided dealing with me. Insurance companies now consider me a high risk.”
And he thought the best way to move past all of this supposed damage was to ensure his name remained in the spotlight with a lawsuit? C'mon, son.

Hide this

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

Filed Under: baseball, defamation, fans, sleeping
Companies: espn


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    RD, 30 Sep 2015 @ 2:42pm

    Uh Huh

    "Rector, a used car salesman,"

    Stopped reading right there. Nothing more need be said. Used car salesman are absolute slime, and deserve every disparaging remark that can be leveled at them.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Oct 2015 @ 6:27am

      Re: Uh Huh

      When a patron was purchasing a new pre-owned vehicle from Rector was asked the reason his current car was no longer sufficient the patron paused a moment then replied, "Rector...damned near killed her."

      link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Vidiot (profile), 30 Sep 2015 @ 4:17pm

    Not bloody likely

    Insurance companies now consider me a high risk.

    Huh? Insurance companies didn't consider my 90-year-old mother in law a high risk, and she drove like Mister Magoo. But then again... no one ever publicly defamed her, as far as I know.

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Oct 2015 @ 9:54am

    Money grab FAIL!!!

    link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    observer, 1 Oct 2015 @ 1:28pm

    Insurance companies now consider me a high risk.

    I'd be curious to see the section of the risk tables dealing with "caught napping on TV and picked up some rude comments".

    link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      nasch (profile), 1 Oct 2015 @ 1:56pm

      Re:

      Yeah, if they actually are considering him a high risk for sleeping during a baseball game (which sounds more like something he just made up) that might be a much more viable lawsuit.

      link to this | view in chronology ]


Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Discord

The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...

Loading...
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it
Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.