In dismissing most of Resolute’s suit vs. Greenpeace, a judge says the company’s racketeering complaint doesn’t prove “actual malice“, as required by California’s anti-SLAPP law, but rules defamation suit can proceed. In other Business news: Ontario’s forest industry pitches its wish list for gov’t; Boise Cascade makes leadership changes; and more on the pending investigation into rail car rationing by Canada’s railways.
In Forestry/Climate news: BC’s forests fix and store huge amounts of carbon; Yellowstone’s forests could become grasslands; and US forest soils emit more pollutants with climate change.
Finally, mass timber projects are celebrated in Toronto; Milwaukee; Australia and the Arctic.
Kelly McCloskey, Tree Frog Editor
SAN FRANCISCO – Environmental groups on Tuesday defeated the bulk of a lawsuit claiming they conspired to smear a logging company with false statements, but Greenpeace must still face defamation claims for two statements it published. “The judge’s decision to throw out the abusive racketeering charges is a positive development and a win for advocacy,” Greenpeace USA General Counsel Tom Wetterer said. …US District Judge Jon Tigar ruled that nearly all of the 296 “defamatory” statements cited in Resolute’s complaint are “shielded by the First Amendment as not provably false, or statements that ‘cannot reasonably be interpreted as stating actual facts.’” Tigar… concluded the environmental groups’ use of the word “destroy” is “hyperbolic opinion describing a loss of forest trees, which did occur.” However, the judge refused to dismiss defamation and state law unfair competition claims related to two statements made by Greenpeace employees. Resolute’s attorney Michael Bowe said… Resolute will file an appeal to revive claims dismissed.
