Follow us!

    Re: court of Appeal Upholds Libel Verdict Against Mold Activ

    Posted by Sharon on 9/19/10

    On 9/19/10, Rem Dude wrote:
    > No, what public should fear are misguided activists who blindly
    > attack, disparage, and intimidate others in an effort to distort
    > the truth.
    > Self-importance begets insignificance. At the end of the day,
    > you’re alone howling at the moon and no one is listening or
    > cares.
    > Sad
    > RD
    > On 9/18/10, Sharon wrote:
    >> RemDude,
    >> You mean people should fear retribution for speaking out and
    >> exposing of a deception in US public health policy that harms
    >> the lives of many?
    >> Is that the lesson you think is good in America?
    >> Forget it. Will not be silenced until the environmental
    >> science of the US Chamber is removed from health policy and
    > the
    >> courts. Too many lives at stake and too many may fear
    > speaking
    >> out in the future.
    >> Next
    >> On 9/17/10, Rem Dude wrote:
    >>> An excellent lesson for those who attack, disparage and
    >>> intimidate.
    >>> Court costs too - ouch!
    >>> RD
    >>> On 9/16/10, sangamon811 wrote:
    >>>> I am from Veritox, and for persons who have been following
    >>>> issues related to Dr. Kelman, I thought you would be
    >>>> interested in this recent court ruling:
    >>>> Court of Appeal Upholds Libel Verdict Against Mold
    >>>> Activist
    >>>> Ruling affirms 2008 ruling that Dr. Bruce Kelman,
    >>>> President of Veritox, was victim of defamation
    >>>> SEATTLE (September 16, 2010) – The California Court of
    >>>> Appeal this week affirmed the judgment in favor of Dr.
    >>>> Bruce Kelman of Veritox®, Inc., determining that Dr. Bruce
    >>>> Kelman was libeled by activist Sharon Kramer. In a
    >>>> unanimous opinion, Division One of the Fourth Appellate
    >>>> District upheld the jury’s verdict in Dr. Kelman’s favor
    >>>> and also ordered Kramer to pay costs to Dr. Kelman.
    >>>> The Court upheld the 2008 verdict by a San Diego County
    >>>> Superior Court jury that found. Kramer libeled Dr. Kelman
    >>>> when she published a press release in March 2005 stating
    >>>> that Dr. Kelman had altered his under-oath statements on
    >>>> the witness stand when he testified as a witness in an
    >>>> Oregon lawsuit. The jury found that Kramer’s statement was
    >>>> false and defamatory and that she had published it with
    >>>> malice.
    >>>> In addition to upholding the 2008 ruling, the appellate
    >>>> court affirmed the trial court’s award of costs to Dr.
    >>>> Kelman, and also found that he was entitled to recover
    >>>> costs on appeal.

    Posts on this thread, including this one

  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.