Legal Briefs: Suing Over Bad Online Reviews
A physician made two unsuccessful attempts to sue a patient’s daughter after she posted negative reviews of the physician on Yelp and Google.
Clinical Scenario
The incident that caused the negative review occurred when Ms B brought her father, who had memory loss and dizziness–possibly related to early dementia–to see Dr N, a neurologist. In the examination room, Ms B began recording the visit on her cell phone so she would be able to help her father remember what was said. It was something she had done at other physician appointments, and in the state where she lived, Tennessee, it was legal for one party to record a conversation without the permission of the other. According to Ms B, when the physician realized she was recording the appointment, he became upset, slammed down his clipboard, and demanded that she hand over the phone and immediately delete the recording. A shocked Ms B deleted the recording and immediately took her father home. Later in the day, an employee from Dr N’s practice called Ms B to get her version of the incident, which the employee deemed a "miscommunication." The employee told Ms B that phones were not allowed in the office and that the misunderstanding could have been avoided if Ms B had given them prior notice that she wanted to record.
Ms B, angry at this treatment by the physician and his staff, posted a negative review on Yelp. The review mentioned “unprofessional and unethical” behavior on the part of the doctor and stated that Ms B was going to report him to the State Medical Review Board. She accused him of throwing a tantrum and slamming things when upset. A similar review was posted to Google.
The Lawsuit
Dr N immediately filed a $25,000 lawsuit claiming the review contained “false, disparaging, and misleading statements.” Ms B, who was now the defendant in the case, started a GoFundMe account to help pay her legal fees. Ultimately, a lawyer who specializes in First Amendment issues stepped up to help Ms B. The lawyer claimed that the physician was using the legal process to censor honest, critical consumer reviews. Dr N initially withdrew his suit, but then refiled it in another court.
The Results
Ultimately, the case was dismissed before it went far. The state had just enacted an Anti-SLAPP law (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation). The law was designed to protect free speech and dismiss meritless claims early in litigation. Most important, the new law also allows prevailing defendants to get their attorney fees paid by a losing plaintiff. The case against Dr N was dismissed. About 30 states and the District of Columbia currently have anti-SLAPP laws designed to help defendants quickly dismiss meritless lawsuits filed against them for exercising their First Amendment rights.
Ann W. Latner, JD, is a freelance writer and attorney based in New York. She was formerly the director of periodicals at the American Pharmacists Association and editor of Pharmacy Times.