Quantcast

Appeals panel says @properties didn't commit defamation in public statment about Jan. 6 rally attendee

COOK COUNTY RECORD

Sunday, December 22, 2024

Appeals panel says @properties didn't commit defamation in public statment about Jan. 6 rally attendee

Lawsuits
Logan square office

@properties

A state appeals panel has agreed to end a former real estate agent’s defamation lawsuit against @WorldProperties, which terminated its relationship with her over social media posts addressing the Jan. 6 Capitol Hill riots.

Elizabeth Andrews and her company, WorldOLuxe, sued @properties and its CEOs, Thaddeus Wong and Michael Golden, in 2021. Cook County Circuit Court Judge Thomas Donnelly agreed to dismiss the complaint, prompting a challenge before the Illinois First District Appellate Court.

Justice Terrence Lavin wrote the panel’s opinion, issued June 12; Justices Aurelia Pucinski and Mery Ellen Coghlan concurred.

According to court records, Andrews attended President Donald Trump’s Washington, D.C., rally on Jan. 6, 2021, and was part of the crowd present on the east side of the Capitol building that afternoon. While there, she posted several photographs on accounts that listed her professional credentials. The final photo, posted around 3:15 p.m., according to Lavin, was taken at “a hotel patio bar depicting a glass of champagne, a patio with tables, and unidentified buildings in the background with the caption, ‘After storming the capital a good glass of champagne is needed!’ ”

The company posted its own statement Jan. 7, writing in part “@properties has received a tremendous amount of outreach regarding the actions of one of our agents, Libby Andrews, yesterday in Washington, DC. Effective immediately, @properties is terminating this agent, who acknowledged on social media, that she took part in ‘storming the Capitol.’ @properties does not condone violence, destruction or illegal activities.”

Lavin wrote the panel disagreed with Andrews’ argument on appeal that the statement “was false, not substantially true and not subject to an innocent construction.” They pointed to an affidavit from Alexis Albertson, @properties’ corporate branding and digital marketing director, which spoke to the receipt of numerous complaints regarding Andrews’ posts, including several such complaints logged on the company’s Facebook page.

The panel further noted the phrase “storming the Capitol” appears in both Andrews’ own post and @properties’ statement announcing her termination, which Lavin wrote “further defeats and negates” Andrews’ allegations the statement was false and supports @properties’ “substantial truth defense.”

Andrews argued her statement used the word “capital” in reference to the capital city while @properties substituted the word “Capitol” to imply the physical home of Congress, a change Lavin said allowed her to argue the company falsely conveyed “she had engaged in violence, destruction, or other illegal criminal acts.” But the panel said those “proposed inference and arguments are unreasonable for several reasons.”

The panel noted Andrews’ posts — the ones that directly informed the customer reaction — made no reference to peaceful protest or the exercise of First Amendment rights. She used the word “storm” and, “simply put, storming the seat of government, whether it is the city (capital) or building and its grounds (Capitol) signifies an agitation, violent disruption or forced taking.” Further, @properties only needed to show Andrews “acknowledged on social media participating in an event wherein such acts were committed,” with the panel adding the phrase “at issue — ‘@properties does not condone violence, destruction or illegal activities’ — can likewise be interpreted as substantially true.”

The panel said @properties could be seen as defending its own reputation and not attempting to defame Andrews, and further that the termination can be read as related to Andrews’ celebration of the insurrection and not directly tied to any personal involvement.

Beyond the statement, the panel rejected Andrews’ challenge to Albertson’s affidavit and the company’s evidence, explaining she should’ve made such a contention before Judge Donnelly. Andrews argued she intended to do so at oral arguments before Donnelly canceled a scheduled hearing, but the panel said her filing did not adequately show Donnelly acted improperly and further the record shows she had time to file an opposition before Donnelly’s dismissal or could’ve moved to reconsider striking the hearing. Even so, the panel concluded, everything @properties submitted was admissible evidence.

Andrews and her company were represented by Pieczonka Law and Tim Biasiello, both of Park Ridge.

Representing @properties are Burke, Warren, MacKay & Serritella, of Chicago.

More News