- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- California
- /
- Wigington v. MacMartin
Wigington v. MacMartin
About this case
Filing year
2021
Status
Motion to dismiss and anti-SLAPP motion to strike granted.
Geography
Docket number
2:21-cv-02355
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Federal Courts → E.D. Cal.
Case category
Climate Change Protesters and Scientists → Scientists
Principal law
United States → Interference with Prospective Economic AdvantageUnited States → State Law—Defamation
At issue
Defamation suit brought against climate scientist and other defendants in connection with statements made by the scientist in a fact-checking review of the plaintiff's YouTube video about climate engineering.
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
08/31/2022
Motion to dismiss and anti-SLAPP motion to strike granted.
The federal district court for the Eastern District of California granted a climate scientist’s motion to dismiss a defamation action brought by a plaintiff who published a documentary on YouTube and Facebook promoting his belief that there “has been an intentional effort to dim direct sunlight through aircraft-dispersed particles.” In a third-party fact checker’s review of the documentary, the defendant climate scientist referred to the documentary’s claims as “pure fantasy.” The court concluded it did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant, who was a senior research associate at Cornell University in New York. The court also granted the defendant’s special motion to strike under California’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) law and awarded the defendant fees and costs.
Decision
04/08/2022
Reply memorandum filed by defendant in support of motion to dismiss and motion to strike.
Reply
03/18/2022
Memorandum filed in opposition to motion to dismiss.
Opposition
01/24/2022
Memorandum of points and authorities filed in support of motion to dismiss.
Motion To Dismiss
Summary
Defamation suit brought against climate scientist and other defendants in connection with statements made by the scientist in a fact-checking review of the plaintiff's YouTube video about climate engineering.