Condit

Condit v. National Enquirer, Inc.

Bad Law

248 F. Supp. 2d 945·2002 WL 31954851·30 Media L. Rep. (BNA) 2537·90 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5717·2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16107

United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 10, 2002CIV F 02-5198 OWW LJOCalifornia11,876 words

Opinion

Wanger, J.

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS OR STRIKE, OR, ALTERNATIVELY, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ATTORNEY’S FEES

I. INTRODUCTION

Carolyn Condit (“Plaintiff’) sues National Enquirer, Inc. (“Defendant”), and un named Does for libel based on statements published in two issues of Defendant’s weekly publication, The National Enquirer, dated August 7 and September 4, 2001. See Doc.1, Complaint, filed February 21, 2002. Diversity jurisdiction is invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 , based on the parties’ citizenship in different states and the amount in controversy in excess of the $75,000 jurisdictional minimum. Defendant moves to dismiss or strike Plaintiffs Complaint under Fed.R. Civ.P. 12(b)(6), or alternatively, for summary judgment and attorney’s fees under California Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 prohibiting Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation. See Doc.19, filed April 1, 2002. Plaintiff opposes Defendant’s motion. See Doc.28, filed June 17, 2002. Oral argument was heard July 1, 2002.

II. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff is a California citizen and the wife of former United States Congressman Gary A. Condit. See Complaint at ¶ 3. Plaintiffs Complaint…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.