Judge to decide on summary disposition motion filed in Levitt libel case
Mount Pleasant Attorney Todd Levitt, right, is accusing the defendants of libel and slander, false light invasion of privacy, intentional interference with business expectancy, civil conspiracy, infliction of emotional distress and reckless conduct due to a story written by Lisa Yanick-Jonaitis and published by The Morning Sun.
Representatives of Mount Pleasant attorney Todd Levitt and Digital First Media were given the opportunity to make their arguments on a summary disposition motion filed to Isabella County Chief Judge Paul Chamberlain in a hearing on Sept. 18.
The civil suit stems from a story written by Yanick-Jonaitis, community engagement editor, and published by The Morning Sun. The story, titled "Mt. Pleasant lawyer suing student admits to fake award, marijuana tweets," details statements Levitt made in court during a hearing. It states that "Levitt himself created the website topcollegelawyers.com, and then proclaimed himself “College Lawyer of the Year,” and used the manufactured award to promote himself."
Robin Hermann, a Bloomfield Hills attorney who specializes in areas of media law, particularly defamation, privacy and access issues, is representing the defense. She argued that the gist of Yanick-Jonaitis' story is substantially true and
"The issue before the court really is whether or not this was a fair and accurate report of the underlying proceedings," Hermann said. "It is accurate and true that (Levitt) created a fake award."
Hermann also cited MCL 600.2911, also known as the fair report privilege which provides that no damages can be awarded in a libel case for a "fair and true report of a public and official proceeding." This applies even if there are small inaccuracies in the story or if the statements made during the proceeding end up to be false.
"Literal accuracy is not required, as long as the gist or the sting of the alleged libel has been accurately reported and the literal truth would have no appreciably different affect on the reader or the viewer," Hermann said.
Mount Pleasant attorney John Devine argued that the headline of the story is false and leads readers in a different direction than the content in the story.
"The case is not about whether they accurately regurgitated allegations in another litigation," he said. "Their headline screams 'Lawyer admits to fake award.' The only conclusion that the reader can come to is that Todd Levitt admitted that he was a fake and a fraud."
Hermann did not agree that the headline could be judged independently from the story.
"It seems that (Levitt) is saying that you could simply look at the headline and judge that separately from the article. That is not the law," Hermann said. "The court looks at the article as a whole and not the headlines. In that context the headline is fair and accurate."
"I think they are dodging a response to the plain meaning of what the headline leads people to believe," Devine said after the hearing.
Hermann said the case should be thrown out for other reasons as well.
Libel has stringent pleading requirements, she explained. The plaintiff must specifically plead the defamatory statements and what is false and the fault in those statements. Hermann argued that Levitt failed to cite negligence, instead opting to apply the actual malice standard.
Levitt will have to prove that The Morning Sun published Yanick-Jonaitis' story with the knowledge that it was false or with a reckless disregard for the story being false. Hermann said Levitt failed to specifically prove the actual malice standard and that statements in the story are false.
"If (Levitt) pleads general allegations that the defendants acted with actual malice, then that claim fails as a matter of law," she said. "His claims should be dismissed on this basis alone."
Devine explained The Morning Sun should have known what was published wasn't true because they based all of their reports on court documents. He also said he will be able to prove the malice standard if the case goes to trial.
"In those documents and they now admit, Levitt did not admit to a fake award," he said. "I ask that the court deny the motion."
Chamberlain will likely take a little less than a month to decide on whether the case will be taken to trial or if it will be dismissed, Hermann said.
"When a judge takes a decision under advisement, you know he'll take his time to make the correct decision," Levitt said after the hearing. "That isn't to say that I will agree or disagree with his decision, but I don't look at the fact that he is taking it under advisement as a negative."
Levitt filed the lawsuit on April 23 against Yanick-Jonaitis, The Morning Sun, the paper's parent company Digital First Media, CMU College of Business professors James Felton and Kenneth Sanney and attorney Gordon Bloem, as well as others yet to be identified who are listed as John or Jane Doe. Levitt is accusing the defendants of libel and slander, false light invasion of privacy, intentional interference with business expectancy, civil conspiracy, infliction of emotional distress and reckless conduct due to a story written by Yanick-Jonaitis and published by The Morning Sun.
Levitt is seeking $1 million in damages for each count.
Individual defendants Felton and Bloem, represented by Jon Schrotenboer, and Sanney, representing himself, filed motions for summary disposition on July 31, which were denied by Chamberlain.
Tweets from Todd Levitt 2.0
Felton's account @levittlawyer, also known as "Todd Levitt 2.0," posted over 70 tweets since April 15, 2014. The account was removed for some time during the first round of legal action between Levitt and Felton and reactivated after Chamberlain's dismissal of the case.
The parody account has not been active since April 13.
Tweets by @levittlawyer
