9 thoughts on “Plaintiffs in Olympia Food Coop Anti-BDS Lawsuit Face $400,000 Claim After Anti-SLAPP Dismissal – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. “I almost feel sorry for the poor shlubs who are the defendants”

    I thought the coop were the defendants in this case, that they’d won, and that the plaintiffs are being ordered to pay fees and penalties?

  2. What is this about? It’s not entirely clear what this article is referencing (there are no links). Is this a case that has been addressed on here before? It’s not among the tags. Is “anti-SLAPP” a phrase that people ought to be familiar with. It doesn’t seem like this is a stand alone piece.

      1. Thanks for the message! I actually never even noticed that such a search field existed. I appreciate you pointing that out and am feeling a bit silly that I hadn’t noticed it previously.

  3. “What was most novel, bizarre and typical all at the same time about the defendant’s response was to claim that they were perfectly willing to accept the $400,000 as long as the coop paid it. ”

    “I almost feel sorry for the poor shlubs who are the defendants. Unless they worked out a suitable deal beforehand with SWU and the Israeli government, they’re going to be left holding the bag on this.”

    Uh. . .I think you’re confusing the defendants with the plaintiffs, which would be easy to do b/c the tables were turned.

    The plaintiffs lost and they must pay the defendants — the 16 Coop board members.

    I haven’t read the latest arguments yet. I recall the judge, hoping to avoid an appeal of his decision, told them to work out a settlement before he went on vacation. Apparently they didn’t.

    But the WA anti-slapp suit law is clear: the 16 prevailing defendants are to be paid $10,000 PLUS their legal costs. So I see that as a $160,000. If the defendants are asking for $400,000, that leaves $240,000 for their legal costs.

    Regardless of what the judge fines them, the plaintiffs will appeal. He knows that. If the judge gives the defendants less than $400,000 then they will counter-appeal the award, since they will already be in the appellate court. So the judge will likely give the defendants what they ask for, so long as it’s even moderately reasonable. IMHO

    It’s a good outcome, but good outcomes sometimes go bad.

      1. Yeah, it confused me too, but I attributed it to some inverted weird legal thing! I am always available to bash lawyers!

  4. It will be entirely within organizational character for SWU to leave the defendants holding the bag. If some right wing moneybags bails them out, it will make more news and I think that is the Achilles heel of Tor and SWU, i.e. unfavorable news. Certainly, it is not the money, but bad publicity. Given their outrageous tact of sticking it to coop defendants, maybe this is, in itself, newsworthy and a dire warning to any others who cooperate with Israeli “lawfare” in the US where you can’t always get what you want, as in the “democracy in the middle east.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link