Rall V. Hellman

Current Status of Ted's Lawsuit Against Cyberstalker

In August 1999 Ted Rall filed a lawsuit for libel, libel per se, injuriousfalsehood, violation of civil rights and intentional infliction of emotionaldistress in New York State Supreme Court against Danny Hellman, a NewYork-based illustrator. Mr. Hellman sent a spam e-mail under Ted Rall's nameto a large number (at least 30 have been identified so far, and Mr. Hellmanis still refusing to provide a complete list of other recipients) of Ted'semployers and fellow cartoonists in a bizarre effort to discredit him andharm his professional relationships. Because he wanted this information tobe widely available, Mr. Hellman posted this "prank" in a website availableto the general public.

In addition, Mr. Hellman made public postings on the Web offering a $500 bounty to someone willing to assault Ted and encouraged readers to vandalizehis car. After one of Mr. Hellman's friends posted Ted's home phone numberand address to the Web, Ted and his wife received threats at their home.

Ted had never had any personal dealings with Mr. Hellman beforehand; in fact,Ted had never heard of him. It now appears that Mr. Hellman was unhappy with an article Ted had written.

Ted had his lawyer send several cease-and-desist letters to Mr. Hellman, allof which were ignored. Finally, as he said he would do in his letters, Ted filed the lawsuit in order to force Mr. Hellman to stop his campaign of harrassment and intimidation against him and his family.

During the ensuing year, Danny Hellman has successfully turned himself into akind of First Amendment hero, asserting that we should all have the legal andmoral right to impersonate one another in writing. He raised $7,000 from a New York benefit concert on his behalf, is selling "Free Speech/Free Dirty Danny" T-shirts and is planning a benefit comic book to raise additional funds. Last fall, using pleas of poverty to raise money from his friends, Mr. Hellman spent a few weeks vacationing in Italy.

Ted has thus far accumulated more than $30,000 in legal expenses. He has not received any financial assistance from any outside source whatsoever.

"Many Americans don't like lawyers and they don't like litigation," Ted said. "But in this case, there's no other way I can legally force Mr.Hellman to leave me alone. He has never made a bonafide settlement offer, and he's continuing to slander me in print. If I were to drop my case, I'd have no way to prevent him or his friends from sending out even more spams under my name. Anyone in my position would have no choice but to do the same exact thing."

Ted refused to file suit against either of the two companies that Mr.Hellman used to post his threats and e-mail impersonations. "This isn't about money," Ted says. "This is about justice."

No trial date has yet been scheduled.

PRESS RELEASE

NY COURT AFFIRMS CARTOONIST’S RIGHT TO SUE FOR E-IMPERSONATION

NEW YORK CITY, JUNE 5, 2001 - In a victory for First Amendment protections of the state’s journalists, a New York court has ruled that syndicated cartoonist and author Ted Rall may sue a self-described "prankster" for Libel Per Se. Mr. Rall filed a civil suit against Danny Hellman, an illustrator for Screw and Brill’s Content, in response to an August 1999 e-mail spam sent to at least 30 of Mr. Rall’s employers and colleagues by Mr. Hellman under Mr. Rall’s name. According to an opinion issued today by the Appellate Division, First Department, New York State Supreme Court, that e-mail made Mr. Rall "appear as a rude, petty, self-absorbed writer/cartoonist who sought to insult and attack New York City’s established cartooning industry." Mr. Hellman, who had never even met Mr. Rall before his August 1999 e-mail impersonations, admits that he targeted Mr. Rall in retaliation for a book review he had written for the Village Voice.

"Where, as here, an act of literary impersonation imputes facts to the person impersonated that damage him in his trade or profession," the court wrote, "a cause of action for Libel Per Se is adequately pleaded."

By rejecting Mr. Hellman’s request to throw out the case, the court paved the way for setting a trial date shortly - as early as this fall.

In New York, case law has long provided protection for journalists and other creators against career sabotage by impersonation through Libel Per Se. Libel Per Se is any act of libel so egregious and outside the normal bounds of civilized behavior that it entitles its victim to punitive damages. It is not necessary to prove quantifiable damages to win a libel per se judgment.

"This is an important day for freedom of the press," said Ted Rall. "Without New York’s special protection of Libel Per Se, writers would live with the constant fear of retaliation whenever they exercised their First Amendment rights."

Ted Rall, the author of seven books including the new graphic novel 2024, is a syndicated cartoonist and columnist for Universal Press Syndicate. His work appears in more than 100 newspapers and magazines, including the New York Times, Time Magazine, Village Voice, Newark Star-Ledger, Philadelphia Daily News, Los Angeles Times and San Francisco Chronicle.

As is common in civil litigation, the justices dismissed several other counts. Nonetheless, Rall remains optimistic: "As I’ve said all along, Libel Per Se has always been the crux of this case. It’s wrong to write letters under someone else’s name in order to harm their career. It’s still wrong if those letters are sent out over the Internet. The Appellate justices obviously agree with my position, and I look forward to my day in court."


Rall v. Hellman FAQs

Check out this file for Frequently Asked Questions about the Rall v. Hellman case.

Legal documents

To clarify the details of the Rall v. Hellman lawsuit, we're posting the original legal documents so that you can read them for yourself. In recent developments, Danny Hellman's lawyers tried to get the case dismissed, but the judge in New York State Supreme Court rejected their arguments. His lawyers have since filed an appeal to the rejection of their motion to dismiss to the state appeals court, which has not yet acted on that appeal. If the appeal fails, as is expected, New York State Supreme Court will then schedule a trial date, probably sometime during the first half of 2001.

Should Ted lose his lawsuit against Mr. Hellman, journalists and other creators would lose their current legal protections against impersonation in New York state; in essence, it would become legal to harass and impersonate journalists and artists. Ted does, however, remain open to settling with Mr. Hellman should he make an acceptable offer.

Ted's First Cease and Desist Letter

Ted's Second Cease and Desist Letter

The Original Rall v. Hellman Lawsuit

Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Lawsuit (part 1) (part 2)

Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss



Back to Main Menu

All Material Copyright 2002 Ted Rall. Web Design: Bård Edlund.