Facebook faces $80,000 personal injury litigation
A recent college girls Facebook post resulted in a court throwing out an $80,000 settlement, because the plaintiff and his daughter breached the terms of a confidential agreement when the she bragged about it on Facebook.
March 05, 2014 at 07:27 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
A recent college girl's Facebook post resulted in a court throwing out an $80,000 settlement, because the plaintiff and his daughter breached the terms of a confidential agreement when the she bragged about it on Facebook.
Only a few days after the case settled, the plaintiff's daughter posted to 1,200 Facebook friends that her parents “won the case…Gulliver is now officially paying for my vacation to Europe this summer. SUCK IT.”
The Legal Examiner reported that the Court of Appeal of Florida concluded that the defendant did not have to pay the $80,000 settlement on the ground that the daughter's post violated the confidentiality provision in the agreement, and showed that the plaintiff himself had violated it by telling his daughter.
These days, privacy settings on Facebook and other social networks do not mean that your posts are confidential. In fact, in McMillen v. Hummingbird Speedway, Inc., the plaintiff, Bill R. McMillen, Sr., sought damages for injuries sustained when he was rear-ended during a cool down lap following a stock car race. When accessing the public portion of his Facebook page, the defendants discovered posts that allegedly showed that McMillen had exaggerated his injuries.
The defendants then requested access to McMillen's Facebook and MySpace user names and passwords, contending that private areas could contain evidence relevant to his damages claim, specifically, whether he had made comments which contradicted his disability and damages claims. In ordering McMillen to provide such access, the judge concluded that “no person choosing MySpace or Facebook as a communications forum could expect that his communications would remain confidential, as both sites clearly express the possibility of disclosure.”
For more on social media, check out these articles:
A recent college girl's Facebook post resulted in a court throwing out an $80,000 settlement, because the plaintiff and his daughter breached the terms of a confidential agreement when the she bragged about it on Facebook.
Only a few days after the case settled, the plaintiff's daughter posted to 1,200 Facebook friends that her parents “won the case…Gulliver is now officially paying for my vacation to Europe this summer. SUCK IT.”
The Legal Examiner reported that the Court of Appeal of Florida concluded that the defendant did not have to pay the $80,000 settlement on the ground that the daughter's post violated the confidentiality provision in the agreement, and showed that the plaintiff himself had violated it by telling his daughter.
These days, privacy settings on Facebook and other social networks do not mean that your posts are confidential. In fact, in McMillen v. Hummingbird Speedway, Inc., the plaintiff, Bill R. McMillen, Sr., sought damages for injuries sustained when he was rear-ended during a cool down lap following a stock car race. When accessing the public portion of his Facebook page, the defendants discovered posts that allegedly showed that McMillen had exaggerated his injuries.
The defendants then requested access to McMillen's Facebook and MySpace user names and passwords, contending that private areas could contain evidence relevant to his damages claim, specifically, whether he had made comments which contradicted his disability and damages claims. In ordering McMillen to provide such access, the judge concluded that “no person choosing MySpace or Facebook as a communications forum could expect that his communications would remain confidential, as both sites clearly express the possibility of disclosure.”
For more on social media, check out these articles:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250