Oct 7, 2008 1:30 pm US/Central
Libel Suit May Backfire On Anti-Abortion Group
Pro-Life Action League Lost Libel Suit Vs. Planned Parenthood, Now Must Pay Legal Fees
AURORA, Ill. (Aurora Beacon News) ―
Last month, a Kane County judge dismissed two counts of a libel lawsuit filed against Planned Parenthood by local anti-abortion activists.
Now, those activists might have to pay more than $300,000 in Planned Parenthood's legal fees associated with the suit. And Eric Scheidler, communications director of the Pro-Life Action League, says that amount may "bankrupt us and shut us down."
The suit alleges Planned Parenthood of Illinois, and its president and CEO Steve Trombley libeled local anti-abortion activists in a letter to elected officials, and in newspaper ads. Trombley's letter, the suit says, painted local activists as violent, despite peaceful protests at Planned Parenthood's new facility in the western suburb.
Lawyers for Planned Parenthood successfully argued the letters and ads were protected speech under the Citizens Participation Act. The Citizens Participation Act specifically covers speech designed for "participation in government" -- it was intended, supporters say, to protect the average citizen speaking out against a wealthy developer or corporation from costly and intimidating litigation.
Scheidler believes the ruling could have the opposite effect, especially in light of a motion filed last week by Planned Parenthood, asking that Kane County Judge Judith Brawka order the anti-abortion activists to pay $317,322 in legal fees related to the motion to dismiss. Scheidler said the Pro-Life Action League exists on an annual budget of around $800,000.
Leah Bruno, head of Planned Parenthood's legal team, said this is among the first cases to utilize the Citizens Participation Act and to request legal fees as a result of a ruling on the act. But she believes no special protections are implied.
"There is nothing in the statute to support the view that any citizen should get more protection than others," she said. "If the genuine intent is to procure government action, then the statute provides government protection."
Bruno's motion plays up what she calls a "significant amount" of motions filed and responded to since the original motion to dismiss in March, and says the legal team had to be paid for researching and responding to each. Bruno said the only legal costs asked for are those relating to the motion to dismiss -- since the case is ongoing, and four more counts await rulings, the total cost of the suit could not be determined, she said.
The majority of the original plaintiffs in the suit -- 17 of 19 -- asked to be dismissed from the case in August, because, Scheidler said, they were "terrified" of the financial settlement they knew might be coming. Bruno's motion asks that they be held responsible for legal costs anyway.
But beyond how he would pay, Scheidler said he is concerned about the effect this ruling could have on free speech.
"That can't be the intent of the legislation, and of the founders of the state of Illinois, to allow the good name of community activists to be trashed by a massive organization like Planned Parenthood with impunity," Scheidler said.
By Andre Salles / Aurora Beacon-News
(CBS 2, the Naperville Sun and the Aurora Beacon-News are news partners covering stories in the western suburbs. Send story tips to tips@cbs2chicago.com. (© MMVIII, CBS Broadcasting, Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
Video: CBS 2's Picks To Click
