Almeciga v. Center For Investigative Reporting, Inc.

185 F.Supp.3d 401 (2016)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D is an investigative reporting organization that produces reports in various media formats. D agreed to provide Univision with access to D stories and documentaries focusing on Latin America. P traveled to Woodville, Texas to meet with Livesey and his co-producer, Josiah Hooper, for an interview on P's relationship with Rosalio Reta. Reta was and remains an inmate at Woodville Penitentiary in Texas and was a former member of the Los Zetas Drug Cartel. P's participation in the interview was 'conditioned upon the explicit requirement' that Ds conceal her identity. Ds agreed. D and Univision posted a D video report about Reta and the Los Zetas cartel. It has been viewed over 3.25 million times. P was featured in the report without her identity concealed. P claims she has 'endured public humiliation, demeaning and often threatening remarks from the viewers, as well as the overwhelming fear that cartel may take retribution against her. P sent a letter demanding that CIR cease and desist from showing the video without concealing P's identity. D produced a standard release form Signed by P, authorizing D to use Ps 'name, likeness, image, voice, biography, interview, performance and/or photographs or films taken of [her] . . . in connection with the Project.' P denied signing the Release. P sued D for breach of contract plus other claims. D filed a Rule 12 (c) motion, contending that plaintiff's breach of contract claim must be dismissed because it is barred by New York's Statute of Frauds. The complaint was dismissed with prejudice. D also sought sanctions under Rule 11. P engaged a reputed handwriting expert, Wendy Carlson, to provide an opinion on the authenticity of P's signature on the Release. P's counsel provided numerous purported 'known' signatures to Carlson (all of which were either dated after the initiation of the parties' dispute or were undated). Carlson opined that 'based on her scientific examination' the signature on the Release was a forgery. The Court held a combined evidentiary hearing on D Rule 11 motion and a 'Daubert' hearing on the admissibility of Carlson's testimony.