Written by Clarke Kent
In the defamation case in Circuit Court, Bill’s liability has been dismissed. Plaintiff’s attorney agreed to sign the order to clarify his position to substitute Bill’s estate for Bill himself. Plaintiff’s attorney however was unsuccessful as Bill’s attorney objected to his new motion to challenge Bill’s liability to Bill’s estate.
The dismissal was based on Bill’s attorney’s argument that after taking both Bill’s deposition and plaintiff’s deposition there was no evidence that Bill wrote anything pertinent or had otherwise interest in the website or blog and looking at the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, there still was no cause of action against Bill. So the case against Bill was dismissed and the order stated the following:
“THIS DAY came the parties upon the Motion to Dismiss filed on behalf of William H. Carson, II (“Mr. Carson”), and, after hearing arguments of counsel and giving the matter consideration, the Court finds that taking the evidence in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, there is no basis on which liability could be asserted against Mr. Carson and, therefore, ORDERS that this action can be dismissed with prejudice as to Mr. Carson and his personal representative.
“Pursuant to the provisions of Rule 1:2 of the Supreme Court of Virginia, the Court finds that the interests of Mr. Carson and of [Clarke Kent, (“Mr. K”)] and the grounds on which a claim is asserted as to them are separate and distinct from those adjudicated in this Partial Final Judgement, the results of any appeal in this matter will not affect the claims against [Mr. K], and the disposition of the claims against [Mr. K] will not affect the claims against Mr. Carson.”