Dan Snyder thinks lawsuit would be better without all that 'evidence'

Dan Snyder
Snyder: Seeks to doink 'alleged 'facts'.' (File photo: Jay Westcott)

Dan Snyder's latest tactic in his lawsuit against Washington City Paper? Asking the court to dismiss almost all the evidence the paper's attorneys have gathered in support of their bid to get the case dismissed.

8 Comments

In June, City Paper, where I used to work (I did not work on the story that led to this suit), filed a motion asking Judge Todd E. Edelman of the civil division of D.C. Superior Court to dismiss the suit under D.C.'s anti-SLAPP statute, which discourages "strategic lawsuits against public participation."

City Paper attorney Alia L. Smith attached an affadavit in support of the motion, which included 204 exhibits that buttressed the paper's position. Yesterday, Snyder's attorney Jacqueline Browder Chaffee filed a motion to dismiss what the filing calls "the vast majority of them," on the grounds that "they are irrelevant to the Court's consideration of the Special Motion to Dismiss and/or objectionable on grounds including relevance, hearsay, and lack of foundation." (It was one of two Snyder filings late last night; the other claims the SLAPP statue is unconstitutional and calls City Paper's motion to dismiss the suit "frivolous.")

Going through all these purportedly objectionable sources of information takes a long time; with this article TBD hopes to make it easier for readers with this précis of Snyder's beefs with the WCP motion to dismiss and its supporting documents.

PART ONE: WHAT WASHINGTON CITY PAPER CALLS "EXHIBITS RELATED GENERALLY TO THE PARTIES AND THE PUBLICATION IN SUIT" AND SNYDER CALLS "EXHIBITS (CLAIMED BY DEFENDANTS TO BE) RELATED GENERALLY TO THE PARTIES AND THE PUBLICATION IN SUIT"

WASHINGTON CITY PAPER EXHIBITS NOS. 3 & 4: Descriptions of alternative newsweeklies by the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies and Wikipedia.

SNYDER'S OBJECTION TO THESE EXHIBITS: "Hearsay; Relevance"

WASHINGTON CITY PAPER EXHIBITS NOS. 6 & 20: Blog posts by Huffington Post's Jason Linkins titled "Washington Redskins Owner Dan Snyder Seeks Dismissal of Reporter Who Documented How Terrible He Was at Everything" and "Dan Snyder's Flack Admits Lawsuit Is A 'Warning Shot' To The Media."

SNYDER'S OBJECTION TO THESE EXHIBITS: "Hearsay; Lack of Foundation/Improper Authentication (Personal Knowledge)"

WASHINGTON CITY PAPER EXHIBIT NO. 23: An article by the Washington Post's Paul Farhi titled "Redskins owner Daniel Snyder moves defamation lawsuit to D.C.," in which Farhi quotes Snyder attorney Patty Glaser: "She jested that Snyder’s chances of winning the suit in Washington depended 'on how the Redskins do this year.'"

SNYDER'S OBJECTION TO THIS EXHIBIT: "Hearsay; Lack of Foundation/Improper Authentication (Personal Knowledge)" 

  1. «
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. »

8 Comments