Anti-SLAPP Law Protects Kardashian Sisters After They Trashed Debit Card Business Partner
from the free-speech-for-all dept
The Kardashian sisters, who are among the current crop of celebrities who appear to be famous for being famous, got a lot of extra (negative) attention last fall when the press started reporting on the ridiculous fees that were found on "The Kardashian Kard," a new debit card that the women had put their name on, and for which they got a cut of any profits. As the negative publicity piled on, the Kardashians pulled out of the deal and shut down the card. The company behind the actual card (Revenue Resource Group) then sued the Kardashians, claiming breach of contract and that the Kardashians themselves were responsible for $75 million in damages, and the destruction of the entire company. Of course, it seems worth pointing out that only 250 people actually got the card in the time it was available...While this might sound like a basic breach of contract lawsuit, apparently the Kardashians' lawyers successfully turned it into a free speech issue, and were able to use California's excellent anti-SLAPP law to not just get the lawsuit dismissed, but to put Revenue Resource Group on the hook for attorneys' fees as well:
“We do not have a mere breach of contract action here, seeking recovery from the Kardashians of the contract damages for their breach of same,” [Judge Jeffrey] Hamilton writes in an 8-page order... “Instead, we have an attempt to also charge the defendants with loss of all other business unrelated to them, specifically tied to defendants’ exercise of free speech.”As a fan of anti-SLAPP laws, this is an interesting ruling for a variety of reasons. It makes me wonder if we'll see more clashes between contract claims and First Amendment rights...
The judge then finds that the credit card company likely can’t prove that the Kardashians ruined its business. “Plaintiff alleges that is (sic) was the publicity that killed off its business and ran off other potential celebrity clients,” the judgment states. “But it was not merely the Kardashian termination letter that did it – it was the onslaught of negative coverage before and after their statement about the fees and charges associated with the card. In other words, the product’s features themselves caused the problem once they became clearer to the public.”
Filed Under: anti-slapp, debit cards, free speech, kardashians