Pan Am sues "Atlantic Northeast Rails & Ports" for libel

From The Portland Press Herald:

The Portland Press Herald wrote:The parent company that operates a regional freight railroad covering most of northern New England has sued a small, Yarmouth-based trade publication for libel.

Pan Am Systems Inc. of Dover, N.H., has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Bangor against Atlantic Northeast Rails & Ports and its editor, Chalmers "Chop" Hardenbergh.

In its complaint, Pan Am claims Hardenbergh published untrue information on multiple occasions about the company and its former chief executive, David Andrew Fink. Both Fink and Springfield Terminal Railway Co. of North Billerica, Mass., also are named as plaintiffs.

In a reply brief filed last month, Hardenbergh and his Portland attorney, Sigmund Schutz, asked the court to dismiss the claims. They called the suit "a constitutionally impermissible attempt to silence a journalistic voice."

Read more at: http://www.pressherald.com/business/rai ... 11-02.html

Text of Pan Am's lawsuit (PDF): http://media.kjonline.com/documents/PanAm_Lawsuit.pdf

Text of defendants' motion for dismissal (PDF): http://media.kjonline.com/documents/Mot ... missal.pdf

I specifically am NOT taking sides in this lawsuit when I make this observation:

Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish sentiments on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of this liberty; no laws shall be passed regulating or restraining the freedom of the press; and in prosecutions for any publication respecting the official conduct of people in public capacity, or the qualifications of those who are candidates for the suffrages of the people, or where the matter published is proper for public information, the truth thereof may be given in evidence, and in all indictments for libels, the jury, after having received the direction of the court, shall have a right to determine, at their discretion, the law and the fact.

-Constitution of the State of Maine, Article I, Section 4

I'd say 50% chance they went on a railfan dream tangent and let loose on Pan Am or 50% chance they wrote something Pan Am doesn't like and hit home.

Musta missed it before, but organized in Florida, not Delaware?
As a tutored-by-tv-only legal scholar, I know which firm I would want representing me if I ever went to court.

I don;t suscribe but can someone post some excerpts from this publication? Would love to see for myself as a past employee of said company whether things are true or just all smoke, or a combination. Lots of these publications are purely railfan wet dreams where they can vent frustrations and pretend to run trains.

Too bad we aren't on the other side of the pond. In the UK, those who claim libel must prove in court that what is published is not true, as opposed to here, where the defendant must prove what they wrote _is_ true. It would be fun to see PanAm try to prove their service is not 'bad'.

Here's a link to their archives,

http://atlanticnortheast.com/onl/iss/archives.shtml

gprimr1 wrote:I'd say 50% chance they went on a railfan dream tangent and let loose on Pan Am or 50% chance they wrote something Pan Am doesn't like and hit home.

newpylong wrote:I don;t suscribe but can someone post some excerpts from this publication? Would love to see for myself as a past employee of said company whether things are true or just all smoke, or a combination. Lots of these publications are purely railfan wet dreams where they can vent frustrations and pretend to run trains.

Simply download the PDF links I posted at the top of the thread. The one from Pan Am has excerpts of the things they disagree with, and the one from the defendant also includes those excerpts and responds to the allegations.

I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend to be, but some of these have my head shaking. Two of the six items are quotes from other people. How in the world is reporting a quote libelous? One, however, made me cringe when I read it, the one about the railroad having many other challenges to face, including safety. That one might get a bite.

"Pan Am claims AN&P has defamed it" was a line in the story. I don't know about anyone else, but I would say Pan Am does a superb job of defaming itself

Is AN&P enough of a media presence to be worth the lawyer fees? It always struck me as a rinky-dink publication that's useful as a regional news roundup for stuff I missed online, but not especially well-written, too dated by the time a new issue comes out, and with nowhere near the insider access to pull weight as an industry newsletter of note.

Smells like a personal grudge being acted out at first plausible excuse for a court filing. Anybody got a photocopy of Fink the Younger's enemies list?

I've been a subscriber for three years now and I don't think it is "rinky-dink" in any way. It is exactly what it claims to be and for someone (like me) who isn't in the day-to-day affairs of transportation in the region, I think it is a very strong and complete summary of all that is going on. The writing can be a little cryptic at times as the editor frequently refers back to previous issues when discussing items of interest, but then this type of newsletter isn't intended to be a novel. I've never met the editor so I don't know what he is like, but he seems to be pretty scrupulous about what are quotes and what are opinions. The writing comes across very even handed and unemotional. In reading through the complaint, I was also shaking my head at some of the points Pan Am is trying to make. I don't see any defamation. Of course, I'm not the lawyer arguing the case. There are far worse things being said about Pan Am across the internet and various blogs. Many of the negative comments are in this forum.

Perhaps the newsletter, while small, is known across the region enough the management decided to try to silence the voice. I think it would be a shame, I know of no other place for a comprehensive roundup like the ANR&P.

I just read a few of the PDF's - seems like a decent publication to me. I even learned where some of the lumber mat cars are going besides to the PVRR in MA. Didn't get into it enough to see the defamation.

This grudge match goes all the way back to the beginnings of the publication.
When customers could not get what they wanted from the powers that be in Billerica, they were left with no choice but to complain to anyone else who would listen.
And let's face it - there are plenty of stories that get passed around.

No surprises here, the execs in Iron Horse Park always had subscriptions. So they have always known what is being written and said.
Their people are on this forum as we read this.

But unfortunately, Freedom of Speech / Freedom of the Press does not equal Freedom from Consequences.

This will not go far, who wants to spend the time and effort on a media source that has a limited subscription base and financial resources.
It is not like this was the Boston Globe or Wall Street Journal.

Billerica is just tweaking Chop back in their own way.

Pathetic....Pan Am upper management should be ashamed and embarrassed. Are their ego's really so sensitive that they need to monitor small trade publications and web forums for signs that people don't like them? ANRP should submit a counter claim for their legal fees.

Only good thing that could come of this? When Pan Am and Mr. Fink lose in court, it will only add to the credibility of the statements made by ANRP. Pan Am has only further publicized it's negative image.