Roffman v. Trum

754 F.Supp. 411 (E.D. Pa 1990)

Facts

P is an investment analyst who specializes in appraisal of the Atlantic City casino industry. He wrote an extremely bad but fundamentally truthful analysis of the prospects of the Taj Mahal casino that D was ready to open. Atlantic City was a dreary kind of place, and there is not enough business for the casino to make it. D threw a temper tantrum. D claimed that P's assertions in the article were an 'outrage.' D demanded that P issue a public retraction of his assessment of the Taj's chances for success, or, in the absence of such a retraction, that Janney fire P. The letter stated that D would institute a 'major lawsuit' against Janney if these demands were not met. D also stated in his letter that he had 'often thought of P as an unguided missile.' P bowed to the pressure and issued a retraction but retracted the retraction. P was fired by his employer Janney. D told the world that P is a man of little talent who disagrees with other people. - New York Post, March 27, 1990. P is mediocre, a man with no talent . . . . P was dismissed or was about to be dismissed six months ago, and I saved his job. - The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 27, 1990. [P] is a very unprofessional guy. He is a hair trigger. - Barron's, April 2, 1990. [P] got rid of a bad analyst, a man with little talent. He's not a good man. - Fortune, May 7, 1990. I think [P] is in total conflict. - Fortune, May 7, 1990 (said in reference to the fact that P allegedly owns stock in an entity that controls a casino that competes with the Taj Mahal). [P is a] disgrace to his profession . . . . I don't think P is a very good analyst. - Institutional Investor, July 1990. [D]: Here's a guy [P] that used to call me, begging me to buy stock through him, with the implication that if I'd buy stock he'd give me positive comments. [Reporter]: Are you accusing him of fraud? [D]: I'm accusing him of not being very good at what he does. - Vanity Fair, September 1990. P sued D for defamation. D moved to dismiss.