The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Libel, the Knights of Malta, and Demons
Not a new Dan Brown novel.
From the Complaint filed Thursday in Avodah Farms v. O'Hara-Rusckowski (D. Colo.):
Avodah was formed in February 2020. It works to restore and reintegrate women survivors of sex trafficking ("survivors") through comprehensive, Christ-centered care provided by Catholic religious sisters and faith-filled community. Avodah conducts its non-profit missionary work across the United States….
During the relevant times giving rise to this action, Rusckowski was a member of the Board of Councillors for the American Association of Malta, a Delegate and Special Advisor on Human Trafficking to the Ambassador for the Order of Malta at the United Nations….
In 2021, Rusckowski connected Avodah and Fitzpatrick to the Oblates, a religious order seeking to sell to Avodah certain real property located … (the "Lowell Home"). The Lowell Home was intended to be used as safe housing for survivors, their children, and religious Sisters who had contracted with Avodah to care for the survivors….
Despite having donated significant funds to Avodah for the specific purpose of supporting Avodah's mission, Defendants possessed no legal right or property interests which would permit them to exert control or decision-making authority over the development of the Lowell Home. Despite this, Defendants through their actions, words, and conduct undertook substantial efforts to illegally force the Plaintiffs to abandon the project so Defendants could implement their new vision…..
Rusckowski and the Malta Defendants initiated a smear campaign against Plaintiffs.
Rusckowski, utilized her influential position with the Catholic community to make knowingly false and defamatory statements to third parties that Avodah was "stealing" and "misappropriating" donor funds. Rusckowski further stated to third parties that Avodah was "labor trafficking" religious Sisters. The statements were false and/or made with reckless disregard for their falsity with the intent that they be acted upon, relied upon, and otherwise disseminated.
In the winter of 2023, Defendants made oral and/or written statements to representatives of the Archdiocese of Denver that Avodah had "misappropriated" donor and investor funds and was "labor trafficking" Sisters. At the time these statements were made, Defendants knew the statements were false and made them with reckless disregard for their falsity with the intent that they be acted upon, relied upon, and otherwise disseminated….
Defendants' actions and statements interfered with Avodah's nonprofit work by causing the Archdiocese of Denver to disavow Avodah as a Catholic organization [and also in other ways discussed in the Complaint -EV], causing Plaintiffs to incur significant and severe injuries, damages and losses.
In February 2023, Rusckowski relayed the above defamatory statements to Kristen Meyer, an influential Catholic leader, who thereafter sent written correspondence to other third-parties stating: "If Keenan [Fitzpatrick] approached you or stewards for money or if he is an interloper in any way it's best to keep him far away. He scammed our good friends out of 500k and is ironically and sadly trafficking religious sisters. Happy to discuss further." The statements were false and/or made with reckless disregard for their falsity. Rusckowski knew the statements were false when she made them to Ms. Meyer.
On or about February 19, 2023, Rusckowski sent a group text to a network of potential Avodah donors, along with Fitzpatrick, stating that Rusckowski and Malta had cut ties with Avodah and further stating: "[u]nfortunately, the culprit is still on our "Friends of Deb" List – [Fitzpatrick] is NO friend – more demon than friend!! I will create another list for just TRUE Friends of Deb!" The statement that Fitzpatrick was a demon was false, and made with reckless disregard for its falsity, causing Plaintiffs to incur significant and severe injuries, damages and losses.
In the spring of 2023, Rusckowski called a partner of Avodah and prominent third-party figure within the Catholic community and national anti-trafficking space and stated "Avodah and Fitzpatrick misappropriated funds and were labor trafficking religious sisters who Avodah employed to care for victims of sex trafficking". The statements were false and/or made with reckless disregard for their falsity. At the time the statements were made, Rusckowski knew the statements were false….
I can't speak to the accuracy of any of these allegations, and thus about whether a defamation case can go forward as to most of them. But I am pretty confident that a secular court isn't going to resolve whether "[t]he statement that Fitzpatrick was a demon was false."
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The Order of Malta is even weirder than Vatican City. It’s a nation. It’s not.
As to demon or not, maybe consult Fester Addams.
Well that was a fun Wikipedia rabbit hole…who wants to bet their Maltese scudo that this is Dan Brown’s next book?
Considering that theoretically anyone can add to it, I'm surprised at how good Wikipedia is. Aren't you?
Oh absolutely! I’m not an editor or contributor on there, but I like to look at the edit pages and behind-the-scenes. The processes they have for quality assurance and conflict resolution are really incredible.
It is bad enough when ostensible adults fight over childish superstition . . . it is worse when they claim to be fighting over fairy tales when they are just fighting about money and power.
If there is a more depraved human institution than the Catholic Church and its obsolete tentacles these days, it is the evangelical church, but I think the Catholic Church takes the cake (a jewel-encrusted, gilded cake adorned with a bigoted message, naturally).
Even still, I'd give almost anything to get into the Secret Archives and just bury myself reading. Imagine the history that is there.
Torture . . . systematic facilitation of the sexual abuse of children . . . financial frauds . . . bigotry . . . more torture . . . systematic concealment of the sexual abuse of children . . . hypocrisy . . . more bigotry . . . centuries of scams . . . collaboration with Nazis . . . parasitism . . . disgusting debauchery . . . but, hey, the buildings, jewels, and costumes are really nice!
All of which is most likely true, but I'd be more interested in the myriad of Medieval intrigues that went on. You can't really study that period of history without studying the Church. I'm particularly interested in the events between Philip IV of France and Pope Clement V leading up to the arrest of Jacques de Molay and his burning at the stake.
I'd also be interested in contemporary accounts of the Cadaver Synod.
I wonder what overheated arguments were used to justify that horror show.
Kirkland, you want to get paranoid....
"A convoy of Jesus-loving truckers will converge on the southern border next week in a battle to stop what they say is a migrant invasion..."
https://dnyuz.com/2024/01/26/the-maga-truckers-are-back-and-heading-to-the-border/
Jesus did hate migrants!
But yeah, while the Texas government are just doing their perenial populist fucking around, these yahoos are the kind of zealots who may do some violence.
Ed will be cheering from the sidelines.
[Also your source is plagiarized from The Daily Beast.]
"But yeah, while the Texas government are just doing their perenial populist fucking around, these yahoos are the kind of zealots who may do some violence."
And do you think that a local jury -- Federal or State -- is going to convict them of anything?
And while the Feds can cut the razorwire, Texas is allowed to put more up.
Sorry for your nullification boner, but I do not expect a trucker to kill someone without consequence.
Wow, that shift of goalposts from "may do some violence" to "kill someone" just about killed ME from the whiplash!
Gret jerb LoB.
And do you think that a local jury — Federal or State — is going to convict them of anything?
Yes. I mean, I don't think much of Texas, but I do think a jury would be sensible enough to convict someone of assault, or whatever other crimes one of these guys might commit.
Jesus never saved anyone, and it won't start with these assholes.
Whether you are an ordinary atheist or a Koran-thumping anti-Christian, that statement is flat out wrong. Plenty of people have turned their lives around by believing in Jesus.
And more people have had their lives harmed or ended by gullible, deplorable dumbasses who believed in Jesus.
I was talking about the "savior" or "eternal life" aspect that some people peddle.
>> But I am pretty confident that the claim that a secular court isn't going to resolve whether "[t]he statement that Fitzpatrick was a demon was false."
Hard to parse that statement grammatically, but this strikes me as somewhat missing the mark of what should happen. Either the claimed defamatory statement is capable of being proven true or false, or it isn't. If it's not, then the statement isn't defamatory, and the complaint should be dismissed. If it is, then it should be subject to the normal rules of proof. Defendants' motion to dismiss based on the opinion rule, of course, seems pretty easy.
Given that this is a federal district court, what won't happen is some kind of weird 'battle of experts' over what or who is a demon. Because none of that nonsense is getting into evidence.
Have there been any other interesting or important defamation cases in the news lately . . . yesterday, perhaps?
#Cowardice
#PartisanHackery
#TrumpGotHisTongue
Carry on, clingers.
There was a total miscarriage of justice that questions the very legitimacy of justice and which I am surprised actually went to trial.
I'm surprised Trump doesn't Arkanside her -- he knows enough Mafia people from his building days and it's testimony to the strength of his character that she's still above room temperature.
Jesus the bar for Trump can never get too low. 'Look how good he is for not murdering the woman he raped and defamed.'
Trump is a powerful man. Look at the power he has over Prof. Volokh and all but one of the other Volokh Conspirators.
Two words: Vince Foster.
Two words: Seth Rich.
50 more: https://nymag.com/news/features/conspiracy-theories/clinton-body-count/
Two words: Clingers, misfits
Two words: Volokh Conspiracy
Are you actually that stupid, or are you mentally ill?
Two words.
Those were the words. 'Two words' was the two words. In the beginning was the word. Then another word came along. 'Two Words' said God. And it was good. 'No wait that's three words,' God said.
I do think Trump defamed her. I’m not sure he defamed her to the tune of 80 million dollars. Hell, he’s welcome to defame me for only half that much.
Most of the award was punitive damages, not compensatory, and the amount of punitives seems completely reasonable for a billionaire (well, alleged, self-claimed billionaire). A $10K penalty isn't going to deter him from defaming Ms. Carroll again as an applause line for MAGA rallies.
Which I half-expect him to do anyway; angry, vitriol-fueled rants come easily to people in the early stages of mental decline.
I'll bid $39M 🙂
One of the advantages, perhaps, of being from the 'sticks and stones' generation; we'll let ourselves be defamed for cheap!
I'd actually be interested in the stats on defamation filings over time. Because the rich and litigious being thin skinned strikes me as a likely invariant.
I haven't a clue, and wouldn't speculate.
I was blessed (nature? nurture?) with not assessing my self worth by what other people think. I have had relatives that were the inverse, and ISTM a terrible way to live.
Heck, someone here called me an autocrat? authoritarian? here in the last few days. RALK has called me a clinger. Brett probably thinks I'm a gun grabber. I just consider the source.
You are welcome to say any nasty thing you want about me for $1!
But I dunno about the thesis - if someone in 1900 called Andrew Carnegie a slime mold who had sex with goats, would he have sued? My sense is no, but I sure don't have anything but a hunch to back that up.
Yeah, this place requires a thick skin. I've been bothered by some of the names I've been called on here; I can't pretend to be without my buttons.
But muting the asshole and then a night's rest makes things right.
Saying that someone "is NO friend – more demon than friend!!" isn't defamatory.
Sounds like a Netflix series.
The statement "more demon than friend" could be figurative, a matter of opinion rather than religion.
A jury concluded -- after watching Trump's conduct and considering evidence -- that Trump should pay more than $80 million to the woman he has repeatedly defamed.
The first time in court with this victim, Trump was ordered to pay roughly $10 to this victim. This time, the jury increased the amount, likely because it figured that amount was just -- and because it thought $80 million might "tell Donald Trump to shut up," as John Yoo put it, in terms Trump could understand. (Yoo described the message: If Trump wants to insult the woman again he will be charged $40 million per sentence.)
One might have expected Trump's lawyers to persuade him to stop defaming this victim long ago, but (1) his lawyers are profoundly bad lawyers and (2) his lawyers are obsequious posers.
If Trump does it again, how much could or should the verdict be? What pile of cash would it take to leash Donald Trump?
This case also illuminates an important point about lawyers. Non-lawyers sometimes wonder why a good lawyer is paid $600, $900, $1,200 an hour or more (or chafe against those figures). This trial was illuminative in that regard.
Roberta Kaplan, the plaintiff's lawyer, is a skilled, accomplished, persuasive professional with an ample record of achievement
and expertise. She likely was a principal architect of that $80 million verdict. She more than earned her fee.
Alina Habba may be -- in a context that includes Lin Wood, Sidney Powell, Jenna Ellis, Volokh dreamboy John Eastman, Rudy Giuliani, and Federalist Society favorite Jeffrey Clark -- the worst lawyer at Trump Litigation: Elite Strike Force.
How did the universe bring Trump and Habba together?
With powerful forces.
He is the nightmare client from hell, a reckless, mean-spirited, petulant, lying boor who inherited his life and stiffs everyone, including his lawyers. Good lawyers are smart enough not to want to represent him.
She is a blustering, brittle shell who apparently was shopping for form-flattering clothing while her classmates were learning rules of evidence, decorum, and persuasion. What good client would seek her services?
He is the uncontrollable, dangerous client. She is the blundering sycophant with a sparse and sketchy record.
Ms. Habba was one of this verdict's architects, too -- and a warning to law students and young lawyers, just as Roberta Kaplan is a worthy example. You can learn from everyone, from Roberta Kaplan to Alina Habba.
Has Donald Trump learned his lesson yet?
Of course, not every lawyer is worth $10 a minute.
It's getting to be a pretty expensive WAAAHHHmbulance ride for Trump. So bigly unfair!
If Ms. Carroll does have to sue him again, I hope her lawyers make an argument for larger punitive damages, on the basis that a mere $65M in punitives "didn't deter him last time".
But I expect that Trump (miser that his is for any expense that doesn't involve trophy wives/pr0n stars, self-promotion, and/or his lard-butt on a gold toilet) will make a little more effort to go right up to - but not over - the actionable defamation line in the future.
... and then cross it sooner or later, because he's mean and cruel, but not actually smart enough to take advice even from his barrel-bottom-scraping lawyers. His ego demands the applause lines at MAGA rallies like Gollum pursuing the One Ring.
People have suggested that it just be a subscription service. Trump pays Carroll a large fixed amount each month for the right to defame her.
There have been some genuinely funny comments in this thread.
You're getting wordier than SimonP.
You're getting closer to replacement -- by your betters -- every day.
Which makes it all the more impressive, since presumably SimonP is usually typing with both hands.
Which will be the most deserved and delightful conviction and sentencing?
__ John Eastman
__ Jeffrey Clark
__ Donald Trump
__ Rudy Giuliani
__ Ken Paxton/Greg Abbott
__ Steve Bannon
__ Alex Jones
__ Roger Stone
Limiting it to one seems wrong. Pick three . . . or maybe just rank all of them in order of how enjoyable they will be.
Hinkley shot Reagan because he thought Jodie Foster wanted him to do so.
What happens if some other nut shoots this Delta Charlie because he thinks that Trump wants him to? Jodie Foster wasn't held liable in the Reagan shooting, and anyone remember the assassination of President Garfield???
Wow, you're showing your age, Grampa Ed. Go tie an onion to your belt.
When you put it that way, she's incredibly courageous.
Garfield was shot by a disappointed office seeker, nothing really related to the current situation. Garfield also took a long time to die, not uncommon in a time before modern medicine and antibiotics.
Jody Foster did not really do anything to suggest a course of action for John Hinkley. If I recall he got the idea not from Foster but from the movie Taxi Driver. Even in the movie Travis Bikles near assassination of a candidate was more related to his interest in Cybil Shepard more than Foster.
While the demon tweet may be non-justiciable opinion, a good deal of the rest of the accusations, claims of misappropriation of funds and so forth, would appear straightforwardly actionable.
The Demon Tweet is a good book name.
Demon Tweet brings this to mind.
https://images.app.goo.gl/H2MdLy5XcbCmtGEt5
Deep cut, but I do remember this one.
I think that Avodah should get together with a woman's clothing company to create a fashion label suitable for Catholic women. Call it, oh, I dunno, Avodah Zara. 🙂
LOL (Yes, I did actually laugh out loud. Made my foster kittens run from the room, in fact.)