1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 182 P.3d
  5. 182 P.3d 455 (2008)
 

MOMAH v. BHARTI

Nos. 59079-1-I, 59271-8-I.

182 P.3d 455 (2008)

Dennis MOMAH, M.D., a single man, Appellant, v. Harish BHARTI, Anoop Bharti; and Law Offices of Harish Bharti and Associates, LLC, a Washington State Limited Liability Company, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

April 28, 2008.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Timothy Kent Ford, Attorney at Law, Mark Alan Johnson, Johnson & Flora PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Appellant.

Charles Kenneth Wiggins, Wiggins & Masters PLLC, Bainbridge Island, WA, Howard Mark Goodfriend, Edwards Sieh Smith & Goodfriend PS, Seattle, WA, for Respondent.

Stephen A. Smith, Kirkpatrick & Lockhart Preston Gates, Seattle, WA, for amicus curiae.

APPELWICK, J.

¶ 1 Dennis Momah sued Bharti, a plaintiff's attorney for actual damages based on defamation. The trial court concluded that Bharti's defamatory statements were protected by a public interest privilege derived from Alpine Indus. Computers, Inc. v. Cowles Publishing Co., 114 Wn.App. 371, 57 P.3d 1178 (2002), and applied an actual malice standard of fault. Bharti was granted summary judgment. Alpine creates...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases