|
RCBJ-Audible (Listen for free) |
Rockland County Supreme Court Judge Paul Marx will dismiss Michelle Worob’s libel claims against Brian Campbell and Matthew Worgul
By Tina Traster
A decision handed down last week in a defamation case brought by the former treasurer of the Pearl River Chamber of Commerce against four former officers shows: ‘You don’t have to be a celebrity or an elected official to be a personality public,” New York District Attorney Scott said. Doherty, who represented the defendants in the case.
A Rockland County Supreme Court judge indicated last week that he would dismiss a libel suit brought by former House Treasurer Michelle Worob against the two remaining defendants because the plaintiff was considered a public figure. public, despite Worob’s efforts to amend his complaint. Two of the defendants had already been released from the case.
“If you’re a public figure, you can’t complain when people say something negative about your activities,” said G. Oliver Koppell, co-lawyer for the defendants. “It is essentially a principle of freedom of expression. This decision is a great victory for freedom of expression.
On Friday, Judge Paul Marx said in court that he intended to issue a ruling to dismiss the remnants of the February 2021 defamation suit brought by Worob against former chamber managers Brian Campbell, former president, Matthew Worgul, former treasurer, Lisa Williams, former vice-president. president, and Jenna Fabio, former secretary.
The libel suit against the former trustees claimed that their negative public characterizations of Worob’s work as treasurer amounted to libel. In her lawsuit, Worob, owner of Luigi O’Grady’s Deli in Pearl River, alleged that the defendants made statements suggesting that she, who served as treasurer from 2011 to 2019, “embezzled money for his benefit and for his benefit”.
Worob, who was seeking $1 million in damages, had disputed any allegations of wrongdoing in her role as treasurer and had touted her accomplishments over many years with the House in the lawsuit.
In October 2021, Marx dismissed the case against one of the four defendants, Lisa Williams, and another defendant, Jenna Fabio, was later released by stipulation between attorneys representing the two sides.
In dismissing the case against Williams, Marx wrote that the allegations were “insufficiently stated” and that plaintiff Michelle Worob could not prove that Williams said the words she was supposed to have said. Furthermore, the judge had said that Worob’s role as House Treasurer made her a “public figure” and that the bar for a defamation case is higher when a public figure sues.
“Unless you meet the standard of meanness – and meanness does not mean hatred or antagonism – that does not meet the standard of a public servant,” Koppell said, referring to the recent victory of The New York Times defense against Sarah Palin. “To defame, you must know the statement is false, or have every reason to believe it is false, and publish it anyway.”
A jury has dismissed Sarah Palin’s libel suit against The New York Times after the judge said he would dismiss the case if the jury found in her favor because her legal team failed to provide sufficient evidence that she had been defamed by a 2017 op-ed falsely linking her to a mass shooting.
Koppell went on to say, “Unless you meet that standard, you can speak freely about a public figure without worrying about being sued. Even if what you say turns out to be wrong.
Worob’s attorney, Brian Condon, did not return an email or call seeking comment. Condon filed a notice of appeal after the judge ruled on Williams.
The lawsuit came after the former directors, who left in late 2020, spoke out about the nonprofit’s history of accounting practices.
In February 2021, incoming House Speaker Susan Perzigian, along with the new trustees, hired New City forensic accountant James DeMinno CPA to get to the bottom of the allegations.
The auditor concluded, in a report issued in July 2021, “the financial condition of the Pearl River Chamber of Commerce for 2018, 2019 and 2020, as well as the results of its operations and its cash flows for the financial year subsequently closed in accordance with accounting standards”. principles generally accepted in the United States”
However, in a separate section of the audit entitled “Notes to the financial statements”, the auditor states: “there were numerous checks (for a small amount[s]) that were issued to “Cash”. We could not decipher the endorsement signature, verify to whom the payment was made. No check should be issued to the order of Cash. The name of the recipient and the subject of the check must appear on each check.
The notes also state that refund checks should not be issued without accompanying receipts, that anyone receiving a check for $600 or more should be issued a 1099. And the notes point out that “several checks written to different dining locations for gift certificates were missing names in the memos. The notes also question a July 31, 2018 payment of $351 to O&R.
Koppell said the audit confirms that the statements made by the defendants were accurate. The court never upheld the merits of the charges against Worob’s accounting practices.
The case has also embroiled the House, which is struggling under the weight of the legal battle.
In a “third-party complaint” against the Chamber filed by Campbell last year, the defendant and third-party plaintiff alleged that officers are entitled to two types of protection: compensation under the settlements for “claims, damages, losses and expenses arising out of or resulting from the performance of his duties as President. The lawsuit also alleged that the House was required to carry insurance to protect the officers against any claims for damages not covered by the indemnity provision of the statutes.
In response, the Chamber asserted that his actions, if true, constituted “a form of gross negligence”, which went beyond the behavior of an officer. The House’s response essentially boiled down to the idea that it is not obligated to cover an officer for “intentional torts” such as defamation and the negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Further, the House also says that if indeed there was no adequate insurance, it was Campbell’s fault because he was President at the time.
However, the filing also cites that Campbell’s successors have since obtained insurance.
Now the underlying issues of the case are moot, Koppell said.
More recently, Perzigian, along with the House, was sued by Williams (also known as Lisa Leote) in a pro se lawsuit in which she seeks payment of her court costs in the defamation lawsuit.
“We are saddened by the dispute involving our former board members,” Perzigian said. “We look forward to the day when the litigation between them is over and hope they can find some peace. We just want to get back to doing the charitable things the Chamber was created to do.