A decide on Tuesday dismissed a defamation lawsuit that previous United Expertise Company associate Michael Kassan had filed versus the Beverly Hills-primarily based agency’s legal counsel.
Kassan sued UTA’s attorney Bryan Freedman in March over opinions Freedman made in news outlet Deadline, in which he was quoted calling Kassan a “pathological liar.”
The remarks were being manufactured in context of a legal struggle involving Kassan and his former employer, UTA, who are in a dispute around no matter whether he is authorized to contend with MediaLink, Kassan’s media and market place advisory organization that was marketed to the expertise agency in 2021 for $125 million.
Los Angeles Exceptional Court Decide Daniel S. Murphy stated in his ruling that Freedman’s assertion was built in the context of a heated dispute “wherein the members were being expected to use epithets and hyperbole which an average reader would not get as actuality.”
“In sum, no sensible trier of actuality could interpret Freedman’s statement about Kassan as anything other than a nonactionable assertion of opinion,” Murphy reported. “Therefore, Kassan’s defamation statements fall short as a make any difference of legislation and have no likelihood of good results.”
UTA declined to remark on the defamation lawsuit.
“Freedman’s protection was that every person is familiar with he is bluster and is not truthful as a result proving our point,” explained Kassan attorney, Sanford Michelman.
Freedman mentioned in a statement that Kassan’s lawsuit “was so transparently frivolous” that it took only 55 days for the courtroom to dismiss it.
Freedman reported he seems ahead to recovering lawyers fees and expenditures and is contemplating filing a malicious prosecution action from Kassan and his lawyer.
UTA and Kassan have sued each and every other, with each individual leveling accusations of breach of contract. UTA reported that Kassan’s paying out was out of regulate, “throwing away thousands and thousands of UTA’s pounds on his lavish individual way of life,” which led to his termination.
Kassan, for his element, claimed that UTA was well conscious of his paying habits and that his company has ongoing to be rewarding during its tenure in UTA. He alleges that UTA did not observe the conditions of their deal, such as a guarantee that UTA‘s marketing group would report to him. Kassan mentioned he quit the company.
Previously this thirty day period, a choose dominated that the lawsuit UTA submitted would move to arbitration.
Personnel writer Meg James and Information researcher Scott Wilson contributed to this report.
