Varian v. Delfino
Encyclopedia
Varian Medical Systems, Inc. v. Delfino (2005) 35 Cal.4th 180
is a California Supreme Court opinion by then-Associate Justice Janice R. Brown interpreting the state's SLAPP statute
. Specifically, the case holds that an appeal from a denial of an anti-SLAPP motion stays all trial court proceedings: "The perfecting of an appeal from the denial of a special motion to strike automatically stays all further trial court proceedings on the merits upon the causes of action affected by the motion...you have a right not to be dragged through the courts because you exercised your constitutional rights."
In this case involving the arcana of appellate procedure, research scientists Michelangelo Delfino, Ph.D. and Mary E. Day filed an appeal from a $775,000 defamation judgment for tens of thousands of postings they made on their Website
and on various Internet
message boards criticizing their former employer, Varian Associates
, renamed Varian Medical Systems
in April 1999; two senior Varian Associates' executives, George A. Zdasiuk and Susan B. Felch; and a 1999 Varian Associates' spin off, Varian Semiconductor
Equipment Associates, a high-tech corporation headquartered in Gloucester, Massachusetts
. The judgment against Delfino and Day included a broad injunction
ordering them not to “publish, post, or otherwise disseminate, directly or indirectly, on the Internet or elsewhere” 23 categories of statements that the trial court judge Jack Komar
, and not the jury, found “untrue” and “false and defamatory.”
In the fall of 2001 prior to the Santa Clara County Superior Court trial
, Delfino and Day filed a special motion to strike Varian's complaint
under California’s Anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. The trial court denied the motion and Delfino and Day appealed from that denial, but the trial court and California Courts of Appeal refused to stay the trial under Code of Civil Procedure section 916 while the anti-SLAPP appeal was pending. At the conclusion of a seven week jury trial the anti-SLAPP appeal was dismissed as moot
.
On appeal to the California Sixth District Court of Appeal, in November 2003 a three-judge panel rejected the argument that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction
to conduct the trial because of Delfino and Days' pending appeal from the denial of their anti-SLAPP motion. On March 3, 2004, the California Supreme Court granted review to resolve the jurisdictional question: Does an appeal from the denial of a special motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute effect an automatic stay of the trial court proceedings? Three weeks after review was granted the Supreme Court stayed all of the plaintiffs' attempts to collect on the judgment and no monies were ever collected from Delfino and Day.
On March 3, 2005, the Supreme Court held by a 7-0 vote that under Code of Civil Procedure section 916, "all of the matters on trial were embraced in and affected by defendant
s' appeal from the denial of that motion and the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over those matters." By a 6-1 vote, Chief Justice Ronald M. George
dissenting, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment, finding that the lack of subject matter jurisdiction in the trial court rendered the resulting trial completely void. The Supreme Court found that Delfino and Day's postings were simply "derogatory" and remanded the case back to the Santa Clara County Superior Court for a new trial where Komar was quickly disqualified as trial judge and replaced by the Honorable Jamie A. Jacobs-May. On the eve of a second jury trial, in March 2006 with Jacobs-May presiding and with Delfino and Day in pro per, the case settled amicably and more than seven years of remarkably acrimonious litigation ended.
Amicus curiae
briefs in support of Delfino and Day were filed in the Supreme Court by the California Attorney General
, the California Newspaper Publishers Association
with the Los Angeles Times
, Oakland Tribune and San Francisco Chronicle
, and the ACLU. All four Varian plaintiffs represented by the Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
law firm and the Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP failed to receive any amicus support.
imposed upon them in June 1999 by United States District Court
Judge Ronald M. Whyte
was dissolved by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Court; Whyte was admonished unanimously by the three-member Circuit Court panel (Felch v. Day (2000) U.S. App. LEXIS 23925). Thereafter, the two free speech activists participated in the U.S. Supreme Court as amici curiae in Tory v. Cochran
(2005) 544 U.S. 734, a First Amendment
case that makes prior restraint
illegal.
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
is a California Supreme Court opinion by then-Associate Justice Janice R. Brown interpreting the state's SLAPP statute
Statute
A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a state, city, or county. Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. The word is often used to distinguish law made by legislative bodies from case law, decided by courts, and regulations...
. Specifically, the case holds that an appeal from a denial of an anti-SLAPP motion stays all trial court proceedings: "The perfecting of an appeal from the denial of a special motion to strike automatically stays all further trial court proceedings on the merits upon the causes of action affected by the motion...you have a right not to be dragged through the courts because you exercised your constitutional rights."
In this case involving the arcana of appellate procedure, research scientists Michelangelo Delfino, Ph.D. and Mary E. Day filed an appeal from a $775,000 defamation judgment for tens of thousands of postings they made on their Website
Website
A website, also written as Web site, web site, or simply site, is a collection of related web pages containing images, videos or other digital assets. A website is hosted on at least one web server, accessible via a network such as the Internet or a private local area network through an Internet...
and on various Internet
Internet
The Internet is a global system of interconnected computer networks that use the standard Internet protocol suite to serve billions of users worldwide...
message boards criticizing their former employer, Varian Associates
Varian Associates
Varian Associates was one of the first high-tech companies in Silicon Valley. It was founded in 1948 by Russell H. and Sigurd F. Varian, William Webster Hansen, and Edward Ginzton to sell the klystron, the first tube which could generate electromagnetic waves at microwave frequencies, and other...
, renamed Varian Medical Systems
Varian Medical Systems
Varian Medical Systems of Palo Alto, California, is a manufacturer of medical devices and software for treating cancer and other medical conditions with radiotherapy, radiosurgery, proton therapy, and brachytherapy. The company supplies informatics software for managing comprehensive cancer...
in April 1999; two senior Varian Associates' executives, George A. Zdasiuk and Susan B. Felch; and a 1999 Varian Associates' spin off, Varian Semiconductor
Varian Semiconductor
Varian Semiconductor Equipment Associates, Inc. is a supplier of ion implantation equipment used in the fabrication of semiconductor chips. Varian Semiconductor was founded in 1971 as Extrion Corporation in Peabody, Massachusetts. Extrion later moved to nearby Gloucester and was bought by Varian...
Equipment Associates, a high-tech corporation headquartered in Gloucester, Massachusetts
Gloucester, Massachusetts
Gloucester is a city on Cape Ann in Essex County, Massachusetts, in the United States. It is part of Massachusetts' North Shore. The population was 28,789 at the 2010 U.S. Census...
. The judgment against Delfino and Day included a broad injunction
Injunction
An injunction is an equitable remedy in the form of a court order that requires a party to do or refrain from doing certain acts. A party that fails to comply with an injunction faces criminal or civil penalties and may have to pay damages or accept sanctions...
ordering them not to “publish, post, or otherwise disseminate, directly or indirectly, on the Internet or elsewhere” 23 categories of statements that the trial court judge Jack Komar
Jack Komar
Judge Jack Komar is a Superior Court Judge of Santa Clara County, California. He succeeded Justice Ronald B. Robie, of the California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District. Before joining the bench in 1985, Judge Komar was in general civil and criminal practice in San Jose, California for 16...
, and not the jury, found “untrue” and “false and defamatory.”
In the fall of 2001 prior to the Santa Clara County Superior Court trial
Trial (law)
In law, a trial is when parties to a dispute come together to present information in a tribunal, a formal setting with the authority to adjudicate claims or disputes. One form of tribunal is a court...
, Delfino and Day filed a special motion to strike Varian's complaint
Complaint
In legal terminology, a complaint is a formal legal document that sets out the facts and legal reasons that the filing party or parties In legal terminology, a complaint is a formal legal document that sets out the facts and legal reasons (see: cause of action) that the filing party or parties In...
under California’s Anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. The trial court denied the motion and Delfino and Day appealed from that denial, but the trial court and California Courts of Appeal refused to stay the trial under Code of Civil Procedure section 916 while the anti-SLAPP appeal was pending. At the conclusion of a seven week jury trial the anti-SLAPP appeal was dismissed as moot
Mootness
In American law, a matter is moot if further legal proceedings with regard to it can have no effect, or events have placed it beyond the reach of the law...
.
On appeal to the California Sixth District Court of Appeal, in November 2003 a three-judge panel rejected the argument that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction
Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction is the practical authority granted to a formally constituted legal body or to a political leader to deal with and make pronouncements on legal matters and, by implication, to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility...
to conduct the trial because of Delfino and Days' pending appeal from the denial of their anti-SLAPP motion. On March 3, 2004, the California Supreme Court granted review to resolve the jurisdictional question: Does an appeal from the denial of a special motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute effect an automatic stay of the trial court proceedings? Three weeks after review was granted the Supreme Court stayed all of the plaintiffs' attempts to collect on the judgment and no monies were ever collected from Delfino and Day.
On March 3, 2005, the Supreme Court held by a 7-0 vote that under Code of Civil Procedure section 916, "all of the matters on trial were embraced in and affected by defendant
Defendant
A defendant or defender is any party who is required to answer the complaint of a plaintiff or pursuer in a civil lawsuit before a court, or any party who has been formally charged or accused of violating a criminal statute...
s' appeal from the denial of that motion and the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over those matters." By a 6-1 vote, Chief Justice Ronald M. George
Ronald M. George
Ronald Marc George is the retired 27th Chief Justice of California, where he headed the Supreme Court of California and the Judicial Council of California...
dissenting, the Supreme Court reversed the judgment, finding that the lack of subject matter jurisdiction in the trial court rendered the resulting trial completely void. The Supreme Court found that Delfino and Day's postings were simply "derogatory" and remanded the case back to the Santa Clara County Superior Court for a new trial where Komar was quickly disqualified as trial judge and replaced by the Honorable Jamie A. Jacobs-May. On the eve of a second jury trial, in March 2006 with Jacobs-May presiding and with Delfino and Day in pro per, the case settled amicably and more than seven years of remarkably acrimonious litigation ended.
Amicus curiae
Amicus curiae
An amicus curiae is someone, not a party to a case, who volunteers to offer information to assist a court in deciding a matter before it...
briefs in support of Delfino and Day were filed in the Supreme Court by the California Attorney General
California Attorney General
The California Attorney General is the State Attorney General of California. The officer's duty is to ensure that "the laws of the state are uniformly and adequately enforced" The Attorney General carries out the responsibilities of the office through the California Department of Justice.The...
, the California Newspaper Publishers Association
California Newspaper Publishers Association
The California Newspaper Publishers Association is a nonprofit trade association founded in 1888 that represents the daily and weekly newspapers of California. Its diverse membership consists of over 500 newspapers that elect 35 individuals to its governing board of directors...
with the Los Angeles Times
Los Angeles Times
The Los Angeles Times is a daily newspaper published in Los Angeles, California, since 1881. It was the second-largest metropolitan newspaper in circulation in the United States in 2008 and the fourth most widely distributed newspaper in the country....
, Oakland Tribune and San Francisco Chronicle
San Francisco Chronicle
thumb|right|upright|The Chronicle Building following the [[1906 San Francisco earthquake|1906 earthquake]] and fireThe San Francisco Chronicle is a newspaper serving primarily the San Francisco Bay Area of the U.S. state of California, but distributed throughout Northern and Central California,...
, and the ACLU. All four Varian plaintiffs represented by the Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP is an international law firm founded in San Francisco. Orrick traces its roots back to 1863, making it the oldest continuously-operating law firm in San Francisco, and the second-oldest privately-held company in San Francisco after Levi Strauss & Co....
law firm and the Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP failed to receive any amicus support.
Free speech issues
The plaintiffs always sought to silence Delfino and Day, and yet, both defendants posted every day of the litigation even when illegally constrained by the courts. On September 11, 2000, a preliminary injunctionPreliminary injunction
A preliminary injunction, in equity, is an injunction entered by a court prior to a final determination of the merits of a legal case, in order to restrain a party from going forward with a course of conduct or compelling a party to continue with a course of conduct until the case has been decided...
imposed upon them in June 1999 by United States District Court
United States district court
The United States district courts are the general trial courts of the United States federal court system. Both civil and criminal cases are filed in the district court, which is a court of law, equity, and admiralty. There is a United States bankruptcy court associated with each United States...
Judge Ronald M. Whyte
Ronald M. Whyte
Ronald M. Whyte is a United States federal judge in San Jose, California.Born in Pomona, California, Whyte earned an A.B. in Mathematics from Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut in 1964, and a J.D. degree from the USC Gould School of Law in Los Angeles, California in 1967.Whyte was in...
was dissolved by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Court; Whyte was admonished unanimously by the three-member Circuit Court panel (Felch v. Day (2000) U.S. App. LEXIS 23925). Thereafter, the two free speech activists participated in the U.S. Supreme Court as amici curiae in Tory v. Cochran
Tory v. Cochran
Tory v. Cochran, 544 U.S. 734 , is a United States Supreme Court case involving libel. The case began in California with Johnnie Cochran, the famed attorney who represented O.J. Simpson, suing his former client Ulysses Tory for libel and invasion of privacy...
(2005) 544 U.S. 734, a First Amendment
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering...
case that makes prior restraint
Prior restraint
Prior restraint or prior censorship is censorship in which certain material may not be published or communicated, rather than not prohibiting publication but making the publisher answerable for what is made known...
illegal.
External links
- Delfino and Day's U.S. Supreme Court Amicus Brief in support of Tory
- Delfino v. Agilent California Sixth District Court of Appeal opinion
- Horvitz & Levy LLP website discussion of Varian v. Delfino
- MoBeta Inc. Business Wire press release(s)
- Varian v. Delfino California Sixth District Court of Appeal opinion
- Varian v. Delfino California Supreme Court opinion
- Varian v. Delfino California Supreme Court study guide
- Varian v. Delfino California Supreme Court summary
- Yahoo! Finance Varian message board - The site of continuous derogatory exchanges between Delfino and possibly other supporters and Varian employees.
Further reading
- Anderson, Craig. Court Kills Web Defamation Verdict, Daily Journal, March 4, 2005
- Bay, Tina Company Held Immune from Tort Action Over Threats Employee Allegedly Made Through Work Computer, Metropolitan News-Enterprise, December 15, 2006
- Becker, Amanda 20 to Watch Under 40, Daily Journal, January 31, 2007
- Cummins, Erik Attorney Who Advocates for Public Access Wins Praise, March 16, 2005
- Delfino, Michelangelo and Mary E. Day. Be Careful Who You SLAPP, MoBeta Pub., 2002
- Eisenberg, Jon B. and Jeremy B. Rosen. Unmasking "crack_smoking_jesus": Do Internet Service Providers have a Tarasoff Duty to Divulge the Identity of a Subscriber Who is Making Death Threats?, 25 Hastings Comm. & Ent. LJ 683, 2003
- Hamm, Andrew F. Authors' Battle with Varian Puts Bookstores in the Middle, Business Journal, January 17, 2003
- Hasan, Najeeb. InterNot Free Speech, Metro, 3-27/4-02-2003
- Kravets, David. Calif. Justices´ Ruling Bodes Well for Online Speech, USA Today, March 4, 2005
- Lafferty, Shannon. Contempt Claim Brought in Internet Libel War, The Recorder, January 9, 2003
- Yeung, Bernice. Libel, or Liable to Make You Laugh?, San Francisco Weekly, December 5, 2001
- SLAPP Happy, Metroactive News & Issues, October 16-22, 2003