is it illegal to say the case is over before your day at court?

January 18, 2015 12:24 PM

What are the legal ramifications (if any) of publicly misrepresenting the outcome of a lawsuit before it has reached a formal resolution?

Let's say you're being sued, let's also say you've sought council and legal arrangements but there's been no decision as to whether you settle for a specific amount with the other party or whether the case will be heard in court.

Now what if you publicly (and on record) state that there has been a resolution for this case? For example, you state that the case has been settled out court for an undisclosed sum. But it hasn't. Is that illegal? Is is misrepresentation? Fraud, even?

Note that I'm not asking for any personal pending legal cases, this question just popped into my head and I got really curious.

posted by Vrai to Law & Government (9 answers total)

Now what if you publicly (and on record) state that there has been a resolution for this case?

As a lawyer, I don't know what "on record" means, but you can lie to anyone in the world so long as it does not cause them damages. (taking offense at being lied to is not "damages"). The party suing you, if they hear about it, of course is welcome to say publicly (and "on record") that you are full of it.
posted by Tanizaki at 12:30 PM on January 18, 2015 [4 favorites]

Response by poster: @tanizaki In my example I meant 'on record' to mean that the lie was told either directly to a reporter or, if you were a celebrity or someone famous, in a statement on your own blog/website/twitter, etc.

As opposed to just saying it to some person on the street.
posted by Vrai at 12:34 PM on January 18, 2015

tanizaki has it--also--I would be very very wary of asserting a resolution on any formal "record" of financial disclosure if it misrepresented current or future assets or liabilities.
posted by rmhsinc at 12:35 PM on January 18, 2015

The biggest problem would probably be between the lawyer and their client, not between the lawyer and the public, or the lawyer and the bar association or whatever. If the lawyer represents that it's to be resolved in some concrete way and it doesn't go that way, there could be damage to the client.
posted by rhizome at 1:16 PM on January 18, 2015

Best answer: You can tell anyone anything as long as you're not using the lie to get something that you could not get under the actual circumstances.

So, Madonna cannot come to my house and insist I have to move out because it was awarded to her in court when it wasn't, but she can tell everyone that that she was awarded my house in court.

"On record" is not a legal precedent, it's about source ethics in journalism (actually). Madonna could tell a reporter "off the record" that she owns my house now and the reporter could turn around and print it without naming the source and his ass would be covered in most countries with a relatively free press, but exactly how it would be phrased would be an editorial decision.

But she could also just flat out tell the reporter, fully on the record, that she owns my house even though that is patently untrue. Some publications require an assertion like to that to be fact-checked, but even that is mostly about reputation as a reliable news source and adhering to ethics rather than any legal liability, though they might expose themselves to some legal action by me if I could prove damages caused by printing it. But eventually Madonna would see pictures of my house and lose interest in this weird game of hers and we'd both have to find some other way to keep our names in the gossip column.
posted by Lyn Never at 1:17 PM on January 18, 2015 [15 favorites]

IAAL but IANYL and this is not legal advice but . . . in my jurisdiction anyway, a person who is representing themselves (proceeding without a lawyer) is expected by the court to conduct themselves to the same rule of ethics as sworn lawyers. There is an explicit rule not to lie about anything to anyone, and there's also a rule about trial / case publicity, erring on the side of not commenting until it's resolved or only referring to facts or analyses that are already before the court. Your local rules may have an answer.
posted by mibo at 1:41 PM on January 18, 2015 [3 favorites]

And let's not forget that even if it's not illegal by the letter of the law, doesn't mean it won't open you to a lawsuit which may or may not be successful depending on how that person was affected.
posted by inturnaround at 1:55 PM on January 18, 2015 [1 favorite]

Following up on inturnaround's point, I can imagine a situation where a corporation misrepresents to shareholders the status of some lawsuit -- thus manipulating share price -- and opening itself up to a shareholder lawsuit. Off the top of my head I can't think of any major examples you would have heard of, but I know from personal experience that this happens to privately held corporations.
posted by stowaway at 2:28 PM on January 18, 2015

Things may be different if you are talking about a case involving a publicly traded company.
posted by srboisvert at 4:10 PM on January 18, 2015 [1 favorite]