Legal News

"Libel-Proof" Defense Fails in Case Over Britney Book

By Matthew Heller, Editor

Former Britney Spears manager Osama "Sam" Lutfi has won a major legal victory as a California appeals court ruled that he was not "libel-proof" when Spears's mother published allegedly defamatory statements about him in a tell-all book.

Sam Lutfi	Lynne Spears

California's state courts have not recognized the ?libel-proof? doctrine but Lynne Spears argued that it applied to ?Through the Storm,? in which she depicted him as a ?Svengali?-esque figure who, in order to control Britney Spears, hid her cell phones and dog and disabled several of her cars.

Before publishing the book, Lynne Spears accused Lutfi of mistreating her daughter in a February 2008 court declaration that was widely publicized. ?The evidence will show that the book could not have been the cause of any harm to Lutfi, and that his reputation was already widely established well in advance of the book,? she said in an anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the case.

But the 2nd District Court of Appeal today affirmed a trial judge who denied the motion, finding that ?this is not an appropriate case for application of the [libel-proof] doctrine? in part because Lutfi ?has no criminal convictions which would suggest a general propensity towards the type of behavior described by Spears.?

?Lutfi?s reputation was not so badly tarnished by the allegations in Spears?s court filed declaration as to be immune from further damage,? the opinion concluded.

The court also ordered Spears to pay the costs incurred by Lutfi in opposing her appeal. If the anti-SLAPP motion had been granted, he would have been automatically liable for Spears's legal expenses.

?Through the Storm,? which was published in September 2008, refers to Lutfi as a ?predator? and a ?fake.? In his complaint, Lutfi alleged that Spears wrote it as part of a ?smear campaign? designed to ?destroy Lutfi and drive him out of Britney's life,? subjecting him to ?unfathomable amounts of ridicule and public scorn.?

Federal courts have found that Henry Wynberg, a former boyfriend of Elizabeth Taylor, and Penthouse publisher Bob Guccione were libel-proof plaintiffs. But the 2nd District said those cases ?depict factual scenarios in which the plaintiff?s reputation is tarnished by criminal convictions or specific acknowledgement of the acts of which the plaintiff has been accused.?

Wynberg was accused by the National Enquirer of using his relationship with Taylor for financial gain, while Hustler magazine accused Guccione of adultery.

?Significantly, Lutfi was neither convicted of any offenses related to the alleged behavior described in [Spears's] book, nor did he admit to such behavior,? Justice Victoria M. Chavez wrote for the court. ?And while news media did report on the allegations made in Spears?s declaration to the superior court, such reports accurately depicted those allegations as unproven accusations made in a court filed document.?

The court did not rule out allowing the libel-proof defense in future cases. With the decision, Lutfi's case can now move into depositions and other discovery.

By Matthew Heller
On Point

Full post as published by On Point News on November 23, 2010 (boomark / email).