Difference between revisions of "Free Speech Alive And Well In Cobb"

It was the second defamation suit filed by the same plaintiff, Christopher Curry, against the same defendants in less than 6 months for alleged defamatory accusations on the mcmasterforcobb.com website. The first lawsuit was filed in Cobb County Superior Court on August 17, 2022 against former Superior Court Judge candidate Matt McMaster, his law firm, and his campaign entity, McMaster For Cobb LLC and was voluntarily dismissed by Curry on December 2, 2022–less than one week from the day the case was set to be heard before the Honorable Henry R. Thompson. Curry then filed the second defamation suit against the same parties on December 8, 2022. The irony: Curry’s name does not appear anywhere in the article complained of. Rather, Curry’s attorney Michael Kramer insisted that because the site had a link to a court document which included Curry’s name on it “14 times,” the article itself was defamatory to Curry even without his name included. The court, however, never reached the issue of whether Curry could be “defamed by reference” as argued because Curry could not prove other material elements for his case to pass Constitutional muster against McMaster’s anti-SLAPP motion.

 

Plaintiff Christopher Curry alleged that the defendants, Matthew D. McMaster, Matthew D. McMaster LLC and McMaster For Cobb LLC (collectively referred to as “McMaster”) accused Curry of committing statutory rape and of being “dangerous” in McMaster’s article entitled “Why I’m Running” (available here: ). McMaster filed  an anti-SLAPP motion to strike Curry’s complaint on December 16, 2022, and the case was set down for a hearing in February 15, 2023.

 

At the hearing on McMaster’s anti-SLAPP motion, Curry’s attorney argued that the alleged accusations against Curry of statutory rape and of being “dangerous” constituted libel per se. Libel per se under Georgia law requires a charge of …. However, not only was the article completely void of Curry’s name, no accusation of statutory rape could be pointed to by Curry’s attorney. The full “Why I’m Running” article can still be viewed here … .

 

“I won the case by results only” McMaster stated after the hearing. “I can’t say that my presentation had much to do with it.” McMaster continued: “At the end of the day, the record simply showed the facts and the law were on my side and that became more and more apparent the more the opposing counsel spoke. It was really a ridiculous case to have to defend against, and I felt Judge Thompson took it seriously but also with some tongue-in-cheek humor.” McMaster didn’t elaborate on that but some exerts of Judge Thompson’s interrogation of Curry’s counsel from the hearing shed some light on McMaster’s comment:

Andy Lee White