Search results
The crux of Yelp’s remaining arguments center around the First Amendment, due process, and the Communications Decency Act. As of this writing, the defamatory reviews remain in Hassell’s Yelp profile, perpetually causing her harm unless the California Supreme Court upholds the lower courts’ rulings. First Amendment
3 lip 2018 · California’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of Yelp in the defamation case Hassell v. Bird, declaring that the platform couldn’t be forced to take down falsely negative reviews.
15 cze 2021 · On July 2nd, the Supreme Court of California ruled that Yelp cannot be ordered by businesses to remove defamatory posts as it "could interfere with and undermine the viability of an online platform," according to AP News. This case was opened up by Dawn Hassell at a San Francisco law firm back in 2013.
Plaintiff Eric Gruber sued Yelp on behalf of himself and a proposed class of similarly situated persons under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) (Pen. Code, § 630 et seq.) for allegedly recording his phone conversations with Yelp sales representatives without his notice or consent.
The court found that the evidence showed that (1) Yelp highlighted Bird’s defamatory reviews on Yelp.com by explicitly recommending one of her reviews, and also by refusing to take account of a “litany” of favorable reviews that users had posted when it calculated a “star rating” for the Hassell law firm; (2) Yelp’s motion to vacate ...
Plaintiffs brought the underlying lawsuit alleging that certain consumer reviews posted on Yelp were libelous. Yelp was not named as a defendant and did not participate in the judicial proceedings that led to the eventual default judgment.
3 gru 2018 · On July 2, 2018, in Hassell v. Bird (2018) 5 Cal.5th 522, the California Supreme Court held that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 prohibits courts from ordering Yelp to remove defamatory consumer reviews posted by an attorney’s former client.
