Defamation Lawyer Disclaimer
The facts are unproven allegations of the Plaintiff and all commentary is based upon the allegations, the truthfulness and accuracy of which are likely in dispute.
BLACK DAWG SEALCOAT, LLC and BLACK DAWG FRANCHISE GROUP, LLC v. AMERISEAL SEALCOATING and ANDREW WRIGHT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE (CONCORD)
The interesting thing about this case is that an executive of the Defendant was sued individually because the Plaintiff believes he actually committed some of the acts complained of. Not only can an individual who took a specific action be personally and individually liable but the executives of a company who are directing or managing this type of alleged unlawful activity can also be held personally liable. The idea that a corporation provides protection against these types of claims is an urban legend. Don’t think that all because you are a corporation that you can’t be sued and held responsible individually.
Plaintiffs and Defendants are competitors in the business of “seal coating driveways and parking lots”. The Defendants are alleged to have placed negative, phony reviews about the Plaintiff on the Internet that are defamatory in nature.
The Plaintiff alleges violations of the Anti-Cyberpiracy Consumer Protection Act, federal unfair competition, unfair and deceptive acts and practices, and common law defamation. Black Dawg request immediate and permanent injunctive relief, transfer of the infringing domain names, disgorgement of profits, actual damages, statutory damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees, punitive damages, and compensatory damages. Traverse Internet Law Cross-Reference Number 1492.