Skip to content

Neumann v. Liles

Post categories

  1. Libel and Privacy
Proprietors of Dancing Deer Mountain, a wedding venue in Oregon, sued a Google reviewer, Christopher Liles, for libel following his…

Proprietors of Dancing Deer Mountain, a wedding venue in Oregon, sued a Google reviewer, Christopher Liles, for libel following his negative review of his experience at a wedding there. The Oregon Court of Appeals held that some of the defendant’s statements were actionable, such as calling the plaintiff “rude” and “crooked,” while the defendant argued that those were non-actionable statements of opinion. This filing was asking the Oregon Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals decisions. The Reporters Committee argued that the Oregon Supreme Court should accept the defendants Petition for Review because of the importance of clarifying what non-actionable opinion is in the state. The Court of Appeals decisions created confusion as to what may be stated in an online review and what will expose a commenter to liability. Such confusion could limit free speech and have serious consequences for public debate. Clarification of what constitutes opinion is important to journalists because journalists as well as online reviewers publish their opinions in articles and should know what is non-actionable. The Oregon Supreme Court granted the petition for review on November 20, 2014.

Neumann v. Liles