5 ms·
The case is clearly without merit. They almost certainly sued her hoping that she doesn't have the resources to respond to it, which would result in a default
by downandout 14y ago
The case is clearly without merit. They almost certainly sued her hoping that she doesn't have the resources to respond to it, which would result in a default judgment against her. If she is able to get an attorney, she will wind up being awarded her legal expenses and potentially other damages since the case was pretty clearly filed in bad faith.
The choice to include eBay as a defendant in the suit, however, is clearly not well thought out. Med Express has filed a precedent-setting, must-win case against a company that effectively has unlimited resources. eBay will eviscerate this company in court and almost certainly ensure that they never do business through the site again. Since no attorney in their right mind would have advised such a move, this sounds like a misguided individual that managed to borrow enough money for the filing fee rather than a serious attempt at litigation.
- Vivtek 14y agoFrom the article, it would appear there is in fact an attorney in the loop - who doesn't appear to know that this is a mistake.
- DannyBee 14y agoThey know it is, they either don't care, or their client doesn't care.
- will_brown 14y agoAgreed, unless eBay's terms of service includes a grace period for sellers to cure these kinds of breaches of the sale terms. Otherwise it does not bode well that the plaintiff's attorney admitted the review was truthful(as truth is a defense to defamation/libel claims). I tend to agree Defendant should not only win but recover her attorney's fees and costs for Plaintiff's "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted".
- anonymous 14y agoHe admitted that the words in the review are true, but is the "negative" flag on the review true or deserved? From what I understand, just a few negative reviews can ruin someone's business on ebay and posting a negative review over 1.44$ and threatening their business sounds like a rather severe over-reaction.
- DannyBee 14y agoYou are confused. Most likely, EBay will just file a motion to get themselves dismissed from the lawsuit.
- downandout 14y agoI am not sure how would interpret my comment as being rooted in confusion. If the claims were legitimate, eBay would be an appropriate defendant since they are publishing the defamatory content. Moreover, if they somehow lost such a case, it would open the floodgates for anyone that has ever received negative feedback to sue them. Thus, eBay will likely try to make this publicly painful for this plaintiff to serve as a warning to others that would pursue such ridiculous cases.
- DannyBee 14y agoYes, they are an appropriate defendant, i think you are confused as to whether they want to stay in this. They have a very clear safe harbor here, and they've never cared about their sellers anyway. They'll likely either try to get dismissed as a defendant (on some jurisdictional issue, which they'd likely lose), or, at worst, get it dismissed on the pleadings or on summary judgement. They aren't going to drag it out and make it painful "as a warning to others", because it doesn't matter to them. They'll get sued even if they did.
- will_brown 14y agoeBay could file a Motion to Dismiss like you suggest, but they actually have a dog in this fight - because if sellers suing buyers over feedback becomes common practice that could have a chilling effect on eBay transactions. Without seeing the pleading I am assuming this is only a libel claim, eBay may be better off filing a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and get the case dismissed as to both parties and not just themselves.
- DannyBee 14y agoSure, they may bother to file a motion for judgement instead. But eBay has a near 0% chance of losing here, the safe harbor is very clear. Given how little eBay tries to protect anyone but eBay already, I can't see why they would ever stay in this voluntarily.