Gilman v. Toll Nears Conclusion

Bottom of the 9th for Gilman v. Toll

On March 19^th, Judge James Wilson issued an “Order After Remand” in the Gilman v. Toll defamation case. In his order (which you can find below this article), Wilson considers the case based on the Supreme Court decision issued on December 5^th.

Supreme Court Approved Reporting

In their decision, Nevada’s Supreme Court ruled that I am a reporter because of the substance of the articles I publish. In his decision, Judge Wilson concludes “the Court finds and concludes Toll’s blog was the functional equivalent of a traditional printed newspaper and therefore is a newspaper.”

Thanks to this, Judge Wilson denied Gilman’s motion to compel me to endure further discovery and depositions. He also denied Gilman’s request to depose the three expert witnesses we offered in our response.

Finally, Wilson offered Gilman one last chance to prove his case on our special motion to dismiss. In a previous ruling, Judge Wilson stated that Gilman has not provided prima facia evidence to prove malice in my now (mildly) infamous “residence communications” article.

Gilman may file supplemental points and authorities to gleans any undiscovered nuggets in the deposition conducted nearly two years ago. We get to answer his brief and he gets to answer ours. The filings must be submitted up by May 3, 2020.

Bases Empty, Two Strikes

In closing, Wilson states “The special motion is ripe for decision.” Using an apt baseball analogy, Gilman is at the bottom of the 9^th inning with the bases empty sitting on two strikes. He could hit a home run, but he has whiffed on almost every pitch served up by the case.

We expect a favorable decision in the weeks following the May 3^rd deadline for filing. However, this is the legal system so anything is possible.

Stay tuned.

Order-After-Remand