Abbas Appeal Will Likely Force DC Circuit To Decide Erie Issue

Unless something unexpected happens, the Abbas v. Foreign Policy Group appeal will force the DC Circuit to expressly decide whether the DC anti-SLAPP statute applies in federal court (the so-called “Erie” issue).  (For background on the defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion, see this post; for a summary of Abbas’ opposition, the District of Columbia’s amicus brief and the defendants’ reply brief, see this post; for an analysis of the District Court’s decision, see this post).

The major thrust of Yasser Abbas’s DC Circuit opening brief, filed earlier this week, is that the district court erred in applying the DC anti-SLAPP statute in federal court.  Echoing arguments it made below, and relying heavily on Judge Wilkins’ opinion in 3M v. Boulter, Abbas argues that the DC anti-SLAPP statute requires that the court apply a different standard when considering the motion, and thus conflicts with Federal Civil Procedure Rules 12 and 56, and that it violates the Seventh Amendment right to jury by allowing a judge to decide disputed issues of fact.  (The Seventh Amendment argument was not made in the district court; I suspect Abbas borrowed it from the plaintiff in Adelson v. Harris.  There, the District of Columbia filed an amicus brief in response, as I anticipate it will do here).  Abbas’s brief also notes that, while the district court partially relied on the Ninth Circuit for its finding that the DC anti-SLAPP statute applies in federal court, there is now a “sharply divided” split among the Ninth Circuit judges on that issue.

After spending 26 pages arguing why the statute should not apply in federal court, Abbas half-heartedly argues that, even if it applies in federal court, he is nevertheless likely to prevail on the merits.  The majority of this “argument” is boilerplate DC libel law or empty rhetoric that is not persuasive.

As a result, it is likely that the Abbas appeal will turn on the threshold question of whether the DC anti-SLAPP statute applies in federal court.  The DC Circuit suggested that it does in Sherrod v. Breitbart, holding that the anti-SLAPP motion there was not timely made.  In Farah v. Esquire, the DC Circuit sidestepped the “Erie” issue by affirming dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6).  In Abbas, however, because the district court granted the anti-SLAPP motion, it held that the companion Rule 12(b)(6) motion was moot.  The DC Circuit will thus be forced to confront the “Erie” issue.

A similar scenario is playing out 200 miles to the north, in the Second Circuit.  There, Sheldon Adelson’s brief, filed last week, also directly challenges whether an anti-SLAPP statute (there, Nevada) applies in federal court.  Stay tuned.

Leslie Machado

About: Leslie Machado

Mr. Machado counsels and advises a diverse range of clients on various areas of law. He is also an experienced litigator, having tried cases to verdict in state and federal courts. View all posts by Leslie Machado
This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Abbas Appeal Will Likely Force DC Circuit To Decide Erie Issue

  1. Vonve Se says:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCFVzo7eAOI

    I’m in a situation here in Dallas. I’ve been contacted by my former employers attorney over my youtube videos and informed I had “Until Friday” to remove them all in addition to other online postings I had made.

    I asked him what statements did the company have a problem with and he reiterated “You have until Friday to remove all postings and to refrain from posting anything about the company”. Monitronics International is a major company.

    It is huge. It has millions of dollars. I don’t have an attorney. I have removed my other videos and will see an attorney to review them. However, I refused to ‘muzzle’ myself. It is unamerican to do so. I have first amendment rights. I need an attorney. If someone knows a first amendment attorney in the Dallas Fort Worth area please have him contact me.

    My email is justiceforthelittleguy@outlook.com. Thanks.

Leave a Reply