Father Sues Newspaper for Not Adequately Covering Son's Basketball Games

From Lafayette v. Abrami by Vermont Superior Court (Lamoille County) Judge Benjamin Battles; the case was decided May 20, but just posted on Westlaw:

Plaintiff's pro se complaint alleges the following facts. Plaintiff is the parent of a Vermont high-school basketball player and a "lifelong student of the game." Plaintiff's son, who plays for a school outside of Chittenden County [where Burlington is located], is "one of Vermont's top-performing high school basketball players."

The Burlington Free Press is Vermont's largest newspaper. In 2018, it created and marketed Vermont Varsity Insider as a platform to cover high school sports throughout Vermont…. Despite its claims of statewide coverage, Vermont Varsity Insider focuses on Chittenden County schools, many of which have advertising or other commercial relationships with defendants. While scores from other schools are reported when available, detailed analyses of games or individual players are not.

Although plaintiff's son had multiple 30-point games during the 2024-2025 season, his performances were not reported in Vermont Varsity Insider, despite plaintiff's repeated complaints. This lack of coverage has hurt plaintiff's son's college prospects and caused plaintiff anxiety and stress, leading to uncontrollable vomiting, severe gastrointestinal distress, and panic attacks requiring benzodiazepine treatment. The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages and pleads causes of action for (i) violation of the Vermont Consumer Protection Act; (ii) breach of contract; (iii) negligent infliction of emotional distress; and (iv) unjust enrichment….

No dice, the court said, unsurprisingly (applying the Vermont Constitution's free speech provision, but borrowing liberally from First Amendment precedents):

Constitutional protections for speech and press have long been interpreted to protect editorial decisions concerning "[t]he choice of material to go into a newspaper." … Plaintiff's complaint expressly seeks to punish defendants for their reporting and editorial decisions. Although plaintiff casts his claims as being centered on defendants' allegedly false and misleading marketing claims of providing "statewide" or "Vermont-wide" coverage, the complaint makes clear that defendants did in fact report on games throughout Vermont, but did not do so to plaintiff's satisfaction. The gravamen of each of plaintiff's claims is that defendants engaged in "selective reporting" and failed to provide "balanced," "fair," or sufficiently "comprehensive" statewide coverage. These allegations fail to state a claim for which relief can be granted under the Vermont Constitution….

The court also awarded defendants their attorney fees, under the Vermont anti-SLAPP statute. And the court added,

Plaintiff has admitted using fictitious case citations and quotations in his filing to the court despite previously having been warned against doing so by at least one other court. At the attorney's fee hearing, plaintiff is ordered to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed.

UPDATE: Sorry, the initial version of the post had two copies of much of the text; fixed it.

Comments

[bye]

There is a 1A right to be a sub-standard newspaper. It is what I call the Biden Doctrine, if you can have a stupid, lazy President who can't speak well, you can have any sub-standard possibility for any part of the Constitution
A Biden Newspaper

[Bored Lawyer]

What do you think that his bringing this suit did for his son's college chances?

[bye]

YOu remember the scene In Legally Blonde where the new students give their background. It will help him

[Gasman]

What did this suit do for his son's college chances?
This lack of coverage has hurt plaintiff's son's college prospects and caused plaintiff anxiety and stress, leading to uncontrollable vomiting, severe gastrointestinal distress, and panic attacks requiring benzodiazepine treatment.
This says the kid folds under what could hardly be considered pressure. No coach wants a prima donna who will be a pain in the ass with a helicopter parent following along.

[KenveeB]

Technically it was the plaintiff who had all the anxiety issues, not his son. Not that I think it'll help the son's chances any!

[Krayt]

For a hundred years, feminists hammered they were not weak, feeble creatures given to emotion and outbursts and feinting, "like an antebellum belle falling into a pile of crinoline with a case of the vapors upon hearing a rake" (thanks, George Will).

Women are independent, capable creatures with autonomy and agency.

Then came anti-harrassment laws. What started as reasonable bans of tit for tat, and pervasive severe repeated harrassment, bred, evolved actually, a return to a case of the vapors.

Lawyers, "advocating for their client", as they proudly do, to funnel money into their pockets, exaggerate beyond all belief, in preparation for a song and dance before a jury. The vapors is how you get money.

For large awards, you need large damage. And that means an antebellum belle curled up in the corner, shaking, while Snidley Whiplash stradles over her, twisting his long mustache and lobbing crude one-liners...as you can see, ladies and gentlemen of the jury.

[Krayt]

Introduction. Examples, points, summary at the end. I think I forgot something.

Oh, yeah, conclusion!

End yourselves, plague.

Just the ones contributing to the general rot of humanity, rather than exalting humanity and agency, like those who defend free speech.

[IANNAL]

This pro se vapor sufferer apparently could not find a lawyer, but I understand that you just wanted to rant.

[David Nieporent]

This says the kid folds under what could hardly be considered pressure

No, it doesn't; it says that the father does. But it also says that the father is (as you say) a helicopter parent. With my daughter starting the college recruiting process now, we've been told that this is a huge red flag for college coaches: parents should stay out of the whole process, neither speaking for nor on behalf of their kids.

[Malika the Maiz]

Should’ve just taken out an ad saying he was a goof.

[Kleppe]

Looks like there was an error copying the text. Some of the block quotes are repeated, and others are cut off.

[Eugene Volokh]

Sorry, fixed, thanks!

[Darwinnie]

With everything going on in the world, this is what we’re blogging about?

[Stupid Government Tricks]

With everything going on in the world, this is what I'm commenting on?

The "we" is mighty fine, Watson, is it not?

[Alan Vanneman]

Donald Trump is sending the Marines to Los Angeles and the Gary T. Schwartz Distinguished Professor of Law Emeritus and Distinguished Research Professor at UCLA School of Law wants to write about this sh*t cause it's funny. Hey, how about putting that big brain of yours to work on something USEFUL, professor?

[Krayt]

Regarding the big picture, heed the Wisdom of Porkins.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

One might ask the same of the high and exalted Alan Venalman, who instead stoops to scolding.

[CommentMonkey]

I don't understand these kinds of comments. The content on this site is free. You're not a paying customer. And they post several open threads a week. So far as I can tell (I don't often read them), they are mostly consumed with arguments about Trump and/or the topics of political outrage du jour. If you don't like those, you are of course free to publish your own thoughts elsewhere, albeit to a smaller audience.

So why do you feel entitled to complain when a First Amendment scholar posts interesting or novel First Amendment cases, on his own platform, which you are consuming for free?

[mulched]

Opportunity cost. By publishing this post, Prof. Volokh missed the opportunity to post on a more valuable topic.

The difference in value between the optimal post and this sub-optimal post is damages to Mr. Vanneman and others similarly situated. A class action suit is needed to redress these damages.

[John Rohan]

Isn’t there a truth in advertising issue here? Some violation of consumer protection law?

The Vermont Varsity Insider is free to cover only schools that are sponsors if it wishes to, but then it should disclose that relationship, and shouldn’t advertise itself as a paper that covers all varsity sports in Vermont.

[Stupid Government Tricks]

Does it actually advertise itself as covering everything, does it actually promise that? "All the news that's fit to print" comes to mind, and how long has that motto held sway without being challenged in court?

[David Nieporent]

Isn’t there a truth in advertising issue here? Some violation of consumer protection law?

It's possible that there is a set of facts that could create such a claim, but not these.

Despite its claims of statewide coverage, Vermont Varsity Insider focuses on Chittenden County schools, many of which [i.e., not all] have advertising or other commercial relationships with defendants. While scores from other schools are reported when available, detailed analyses of games or individual players are not.

Emphasis added.

Although plaintiff casts his claims as being centered on defendants' allegedly false and misleading marketing claims of providing "statewide" or "Vermont-wide" coverage, the complaint makes clear that defendants did in fact report on games throughout Vermont, but did not do so to plaintiff's satisfaction.

Again, emphasis added.

There's no consumer protection claim in "A newspaper didn't cover this the way I wanted them to."

(And you should be able to infer that from the fact that the suit was filed pro se. If there were a viable consumer protection claim, then an attorney would've jumped on the case, since Vermont's consumer protection law, like that of most states, is a fee shifting statute.)

[Ghost]

If your son has uncontrollable vomiting caused by the newspaper not reporting on his basketball accomplishments, you've utterly failed as a parent.

[Calibertarian]

It was not the son who had the vomiting; it was the plaintiff, i.e., the father.

[TheAmazingEmu]

Ironically, this is probably the most publicity his son will get.

[Bubba Jones]

I wonder if if ever occurred to plaintiff to write up his own copy for submission to the paper.