Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 02-08-2024

Case Style:

Robert Weisenbach v. Project Veritas and James O'Keefe

Case Number: 10819-2021

Judge: Marshall J. Piccinini

Court: Court of Common Pleas, Erie County, Pennsylvania

Plaintiff's Attorney: David Kenney Houck

Defendant's Attorney: Linda A. Kerns

Description: Erie, Pennsylvania personal injury lawyers represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendants on defamation theories.

Project Veritas is a non-profit media organization founded by James O'Keefe, IIL. On November 5, 2020, just two days after the November 3, 2020, presidential election, it published a story claiming to have uncovered a voter fraud scheme orchestrated outofthe United States Postal Service General Mail Facility in Erie, Pennsylvania. Specifically, the article and accompanying video alleged that Erie Postmaster, Robert Weisenbach, directed the backdating ofmail-in ballots in order to sway the outcome of the presidential election in favor of candidate Joseph Biden. Amended Complaint (Am. Compl), § 1. The report relied upon an anonymous whistleblower, later revealed to be Richard Hopkins, a postal employee who claimed he overhead a conversation between Weisenbach and another supervisor. Hopkins stated that Weisenbach’s motive for backdating mail-in ballots was that he was a “Trump hater,” although, in reality, Weisenbach was a supp1orter of President Donald Trump and voted for him on election day.

He repeated his false claims, the later after it was reported by news outlets that Hopkins had recanted his carlier allegations when confronted by postal inspectors, although Hopkins later claimed that recantation was coerced. The story soon gained traction among those amplifying claims of voter fraud, including President Trump himself, Am. Compl. § 6. Weisenbach was forced to leave Erie for a time after personal details, including his address, were discovered and disseminated by readers of the Project Veritas stories. Project Veritas nonetheless maintains that the stories were investigated and published consistent with standardsof “professional, ethical and responsible journalism.” Oral Argument Transcript (Tr), p. 48. Weisenbach disagrees. He brings this lawsuit against Hopkins, Project Veritas, and O'Keefe, alleging claimsofdefamation and concerted tortious activity. Defendants now seck to dismiss the claims before discovery has even begun by filing Preliminary Objections to Weisenbach's First Amended Complaint. That parties frame the action in broad terms as implicating competing ideals lying at the heartof our republic. Weisenbach argues that the stories were “not investigative journalism(}” but rather “targeted character assignation aimed at undermining faith in the United States Postal Service and the results of the 2020 Presidential election” having “no place in our country.” Am. Compl. 44 10-11. Defendants contend that this case raises fundamental concems regarding freedom of the press, and that, pursuant to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, we rely not onjudges orjuries to root out pemicious speech, but on competition in an uninhibited marketplace of ideas where the truth will ultimately prevail.

Outcome: Settled for an undisclosed sum and dismissed with prejudice.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: