Placeholder image
  • Nubeprint Web ad January 2021
  • Katun Web ad January 2021
  • Speed Web ad January 2021
  • Ninestar Masthead Web ad January 2021
  • Biuromax web ad Jan 2021
  • Paperworld Middle East Long Web ad January 2021
  • The Recycler Subscribe Web ad January 2021
  • Paperworld Middle East Long Web ad January 2021
  • The Recycler Subscribe Web ad January 2021

Steven Giannetta SLAPPS Aster

June 17, 2019

In the Aster Graphics -v- Steven Giannetta legal action, Steven Giannetta’s lawyer Mark L. Javitch of Javitch Law Office filed an Anti-SLAPP motion to strike the complaint.

Aster Graphics filed a complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California, Orange County accusing Steven Giannetta and Does 1-50 of trade libel, defamation, and false light. According to Aster Graphics, the posts were “numerous false and defamatory articles” against the company on websites such as TonerNews.com and LinkedIn; specifically, Giannetta called Aster a “toner cloner” and a seller of “toxic toner cartridges,” the plaintiff further alleged that the defamatory statements were made by the defendant “intentionally,” “maliciously” and “willfully”, Aster also claimed.

Gianetta through his legal representative Mark L. Javitch has now filed the Anti-SLAPP motion, asking the Court to “grant its Special Motion to Strike all counts of the Complaint, award the Defendant its attorney’s fees and costs arising out of the defence, and afford them such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.”

Anti-SLAPP legislation was enacted by the Californian state Legislature almost twenty years ago to protect the petition and free speech rights of all Californians. In particular to provide stronger protection from meritless lawsuits to anyone who is SLAPPed in California.

In recompense, Aster is seeking “corrective advertising,” on the part of the Defendant, in which the defendant “must communicate to Plaintiff’s customers that the referenced representations were falsely made,” as well as minimum damages of $1 million (€897,472) plus further punitive damages and its legal costs, as well as any other relief that the Court deems “just and proper.”

Categories : Around the Industry

Tags :

Leave a Reply

Advertisement

  • Armor web ad January 2021
  • Integral Web ad January 2021
  • GPI Web ad January 2021
  • GM Tech Web ad January 2021
  • Mito Web ad January 2021
  • Ninestar Big and Bold Web ad January 2021
  • Static Web ad January 2021
  • Apex Web ad January 2021
  • Aster Web ad January 2021
  • IR Italiana Web ad January 2021
  • Hubei Group Web ad January 2021
  • HYB Toner Web ad January 2021
  • Paperworld Middle East Web ad January 2021
  • CET Web ad January 2021
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • The Jolly Savage Web ad January 2021
  • Ohana Web ad January 2021
  • ECS Web ad January 2021
  • ITP Web ad January 2021
  • CTS Web ad January 2021
  • Ohana Web ad January 2021
  • The Jolly Savage Web ad January 2021
  • Paperworld Middle East Web ad January 2021
  • HYB Toner Web ad January 2021
  • ECS Web ad January 2021
  • ITP Web ad January 2021
  • CET Web ad January 2021
  • CTS Web ad January 2021
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • The Jolly Savage Web ad January 2021
  • ITP Web ad January 2021
  • CET Web ad January 2021
  • Ohana Web ad January 2021
  • ECS Web ad January 2021
  • PCL Web ad January 2021
  • Paperworld Middle East Web ad January 2021
  • HYB Toner Web ad January 2021
  • CTS Web ad January 2021