Johnson v. Barras
EFF and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of the National Capital Area asked a Washington, D.C. court to dismiss claims against a nonprofit watchdog organization and its operators, arguing that federal law and the First Amendment protect them from liability in a defamation lawsuit.
In articles printed in themail@dcwatch.com, an online newsletter and discussion forum published by DCWatch (a government watchdog organization), journalist Jonetta Rose Barras reported that Roslyn Johnson had inflated her employment and salary history to secure her job as Deputy Director of Programs for the D.C. Department of Parks and Recreation. A subsequent formal investigation by the D.C. Inspector General concluded that Johnson did in fact submit an inflated resume and was improperly hired for her position. But in a lawsuit filed earlier this year, Johnson claims that these articles were defamatory, placed her in a false light, and resulted in the termination of her employment with the city. In addition to suing reporter Barras, she also sued DCWatch and its operators, claiming that their Internet publication of these articles made them responsible for their content.
EFF and the ACLU of the National Capital Area filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, pointing out that DCWatch and its operators are shielded by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which expressly protects providers or users of interactive computer services from liability, in order to encourage robust debate in online discussions. The motion also urged the court to dismiss Johnson's claims, because the First Amendment protects statements about public officials that are substantially true. The court agreed that the Communications Decency Act likely barred the suit, but gave Johnson an opportunity to conduct limited discovery on the issue of whether Barras had written and published the articles as an agent of DCWatch. Finding no support for that conclusion, Johnson voluntarily dismissed her claims against DCWatch and its operators.
Documents
Johnson v. Barras
- February 1, 2008 Order Dismissing DCWatch Defendants [PDF, 56.63 KB]
- October 18, 2007 Answer of DCWatch Defendants[PDF, 193.14 KB]
- September 18, 2007 Order Denying DCWatch Defendants' Motion to Dismiss[PDF, 112.73 KB]
- June 15, 2007 DCWatch Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss[PDF, 169.02 KB]
- May 31, 2007 Johnson's Opposition to DCWatch Defendants' Motion to Dismiss[PDF, 1.50 MB]
- May 7, 2007 Motion to dismiss all claims against Dorothy Brizill, Gary Imhoff, and DCWatch[PDF, 497.12 KB]
- March 20, 2007 Complaint [PDF, 2.18 MB]
Press Releases
Deeplinks Posts
- February 06, 2008 Former DC Official Quietly Drops Lawsuit Against Online Publisher

