Trout Point Lodge v. Handshoe

Brief Fact Summary.

Plaintiff sought enforcement of a defamation-based default judgment against plaintiff that was obtained in Canada.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

A domestic court may recognize or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation if the law of the foreign forum provides free-speech protection coextensive with domestic law or the facts proven in the foreign proceeding are sufficient to establish a defamation claim under domestic law.

Facts.

Doug Handshoe (defendant), a Mississippi resident, owned and operated a blog. His blog closely followed a corruption scandal involving a parish president, Aaron Broussard, who owned property in Canada. Broussard’s property was situated close to Trout Point Lodge (plaintiff), a Canadian hotel. Handshoe published blog posts linking Trout Point Lodge with Broussard’s corruption scandal. Trout Point Lodge brought a defamation suit against Handshoe in Canada. Handshoe was served with notice in Mississippi, but he did not appear in Canadian court. The Canadian court entered a default judgment against Handshoe. Trout Point Lodge sought to have the judgment enforced in Mississippi court.

Issue.

Whether a domestic court may recognize or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation?

Held.

Yes. However, Trout Point Lodge did not satisfy its evidentiary burden to hold Handshoe liable for defamation. The judgment of the federal district court is affirmed.

Discussion.

Under the The Securing Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage Act, a domestic court may recognize or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation if the law of the foreign forum provides free-speech protection coextensive with domestic law or the facts proven in the foreign proceeding are sufficient to establish a defamation claim under domestic law. The first prong of the inquiry cannot be satisfied. Canadian law does not provide as much protection for freedom of speech and press as would have been received under domestic law. Namely, Canadian law does not require a showing of falsity to establish a case for a defamation claim. The second prong of the inquiry also remains unsatisfied. Trout Point Lodge’s complaint use generic allegations against Handshoe. Trout Point Lodge does not clearly and specifically allege which of Handshoe’s statements were false. Therefore, Trout Point Lodge does not satisfy its evidentiary burden.