I posted a bad review of a company 50 weeks ago in California. The statue of limitation for suing for a bad online review is one year. However, they sued me and served me the paperwork about two months ago but on the lawsuit, they had a different online review that I did not write. I asked my attorney, "Well, can't we just stall until the statue of limitations runs out on the post they have proof (they have my IP) of that I posted?" She said that would not matter because all they would have to do is amend or revise the current lawsuit to add that information to it. I say BS. Is she right?
Reason why another negative review is on the lawsuit. They originally filed the lawsuit many months ago listing 'John Does' as the defendants, they did this while they gathered the IP's of who posted the negative reviews. None of which were me and they are unable find them, the person used a proxy to hide their IP or something. I came along a few weeks later and found the negative review and copied and pasted it to ripoff report but didn't hide my IP. So once they found my IP, they named me in the lawsuit they had already filed which does not list the actual post that I posted.
Technically, the post I made is not on their lawsuit and the statue of limitations is running out on them in two weeks but my attorney says that it doesn't matter.
Answer
Your attorney is right and you are wrong. The statute of limitations has to do with filing a complaint against the defendant, not on a particular post. The complaint can always be amended and can be amended to conform to proof at trial. If you keep up with your strategy, you will go a long way to proving your opponent's case against you.
Answer
You admitted on an open forum that you re-posted the bad report... You just made their case for them. You have an attorney work with them and stop posting on an open forum. You attorney will not be happy.
No comments:
Post a Comment