Bauer v. Glatzer et al./Order Dismissing Second Amended Complaint
|Bauer v. Glatzer et al. by
Order Dismissing Second Amended Complaint
|BARABAR BAUER and BARBARA BAUER LITERARY AGENCY, INC.,
JENNA GLATZER, et al.,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
ORDER DISMISSING SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION, INC.
WHEREAS, this matter was opened to the Court by Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, counsel for defendant Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. ("Wikimedia"), for an order dismissing the Second Amended Complaint as against that defendant; on notice to Daniel L. Martin, Esq,, attorney for Plaintiffs Barbara Bauer and Barbara Bauer Literary Agency ("Plaintiffs");
WHEREAS, Wikimedia’s Motion to Dismiss was opposed by Plaintiffs;
WHEREAS, the Court considered the papers submitted by the parties and heard oral argument on July 1, 2008, with appearances by Charles A. LeGrand, Esq. and James M. Chadwick, Esq. for Wikimedia, and by Daniel L. Martin, Esq. for Plaintiffs;
WHEREAS, pursuant to N.J.R. 1:6-2(f), the Court made oral findings of fact and conclusions of law on July 1, 2008; and
WHEREAS, the Court's Endings of fact and conclusions of law are incorporated by reference herein, including but not limited to the finding that, pursuant to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (47 U.S.C. § 230), defendant Wikimedia is a provider and user of an "interactive computer service" and is therefore immune from all claims asserted against it in the Second Amended Complaint which rely upon alleged publication of information provided by another "information content provider," as those terms are defined by 47 U.S.C. § 230(f); and
Good cause appearing therefor;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The motion of defendant Wikimedia to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint, is hereby GRANTED.
2. To the extent that the Plaintiffs' claims in the Second Amended Complaint alleged liability premised upon publication of information provided by another information content provider, this dismissal is with prejudice and without leave to amend.
3. To the extent that Plaintiffs' claims in the Second Amended Complaint alleged liability premised upon "statements made" by Wikimedia (Thirty First Count, Paragraph 5), this dismissal is without prejudice and with leave to amend.
SIGNED this 21st day of July, 2008
Hon. Jamie S. Perri. J.S.C.
||This page and licence template are being considered for potential deletion at Possible copyright violations. Please see the discussion there.|
This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 206.01 of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "judicial opinions, administrative rulings, legislative enactments, public ordinances, and similar official legal documents."
These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium II § 206.03 and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).
PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.