Blogging About Running Evangelist Not Actionable

The Georgia Supreme Court has affirmed the grant of judgment to defendants sued for blog and Facebook posts about the plaintiff

There is simply no basis upon which to sustain the jury verdict against Defendants for invasion of privacy based on the public disclosure of embarrassing private facts.

The story

[Plaintiff] Cottrell for many years engaged in a number of solo running exhibitions with a Christian evangelical emphasis, some of which have been portrayed in the media, and was subsequently involved in various multi-level marketing endeavors, executive leadership positions, and motivational speaking. Cottrell’s notoriety grew along with media controversy relating to his character, which questioned the authenticity and integrity of his claims and achievements. The Crockers worked for Cottrell planning two running exhibitions; Johnson was a long-time friend of Cottrell’s who came to know some women with whom Cottrell was involved outside of his marriage; Peggy is one of the women with whom Cottrell had an extra-marital affair; and Karen is Peggy’s daughter-in-law. Karen located and contacted several people she believed had information about Cottrell, including the Crockers and Johnson. Karen and her husband created a “WordPress” blog (the “Blog”) and posted stories based on this information, which portrayed Cottrell as having a long history of misrepresentation and deception for personal gain. Karen sent emails to a “list serve” group criticizing Cottrell and sharing links to the Blog posts, and Peggy sent messages to multiple Cottrell Facebook “friends” along the same lines. 

Cottrell sued.

The court found that the various theories of recovery were not supportable under the law.

Cottrell claims that the statements at issue constituted defamation per se, and complains that although the superior court found him to be a limited purpose public figure in the areas of running and Christian evangelism, in granting JNOV the superior court erroneously applied the “clear and convincing” evidence standard to every aspect of the defamation. However, Cottrell properly was found to be a public figure in the spheres of running and Christian evangelism. And contrary to Cottrell’s urging, the actual malice standard should be applied to all statements at issue here because they all potentially bear on Cottrell’s character, which is plainly germane to his Christian evangelism…

There is no dispute that Cottrell publicly traveled with Frances, and that both he and Frances revealed the affair to others. His other admitted affair, the one with Peggy, was likewise not private. Peggy herself expressly disclosed the relationship to others and that Cottrell and Peggy openly acknowledged their close relationship by having Cottrell accompany Peggy to her family gatherings. There is simply no basis upon which to sustain the jury verdict against Defendants for invasion of privacy based on the public disclosure of embarrassing private facts.

Jean Sica at Thompson Reuters had reported on the case.

The plaintiff’s running activities and the honor of an historical marker are recounted here.

Internationally acclaimed artist and creative director, Dr. Brad Coriell, spoke further to that theme during the unveiling ceremony, asserting that as adults, we appreciate the strict diet, physical and mental conditioning Stan Cottrell must put himself through before each Herculean task of running such great distances. Yet, what we don’t see is the “ring of magic” that surrounds the man on each adventure that can only be seen through the eyes of a child, or an adult with a child-like heart.

Children flock to Stan Cottrell to see and touch him, this man who can do something no one else in the world can do. Most children only need one hero, one adult example that can lead the way. That can give them enough faith in themselves to do what seems to be impossible in their home, town or country. Their innocent eyes consider the man before them who has encircled the world many times with his feet hitting the ground again and again and again to achieve his goals. They start to feel the quiet dreams hidden in their hearts now come forward, accompanied with a giant, “What if? If he can, why can’t I?”

(Mike Frisch)