Volume 4, Issue No. 51
OPINION/COMMENTARY
/ News That Fears None, Views That Favor Nobody /
Our latest as of Friday, March 3, 2023
~ The defamation lawsuit recently brought by business executive Liwayway Miranda is the fifth against Balita tabloid and its publisher Tess Cusipag. "Repeat offenders" they are, according to her lawyer. Last week, another lawyer (for the two defendants) filed a "statement of defense" denying Ms. Miranda's claims and asking the Superior Court of Justice to throw out her suit.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DEFENDANTS TESS CUSIPAG AND BALITA
Lawyer Asks Court to Dismiss Libel Suit
Business Exec Alleges Defamation
By ROMEO P. MARQUEZ
Editor, The Filipino Web Channel
“All that happens is as habitual and familiar as roses in spring and fruit in the summer. True too of disease, death, defamation, and conspiracy—and all that delights or gives pain to fools.” - Marcus Aurelius
TORONTO - The Filipino community's purported "largest" fortnightly publication, Balita, and its publisher, Teresita "Tess" Cusipag, have asked the Superior Court of Justice to dismiss the lawsuit against them, branding it "baseless and unmeritorious".
Through their lawyer Dominador Saludares aka Jun Saludares, the two defendants formally filed their reaction to accusations by business executive Liwayway Miranda that she was defamed and her business and personal reputation damaged by their published allegations.
In a "statement of defense" filing last week, Saludares appears to sidestep the alleged defamatory issues raised by Ms. Miranda in the December 16-31, 2022 issue of Balita headlined: "BEWARE . . . Toronto scammers abound around us!"
He denied eight of Ms. Miranda's allegations, and claimed "no knowledge" of 14, calling them "highly irrelevant".
He also sought to cap her monetary claims to $200,000, which is $50,000 less, saying the amount is "over and above its jurisdictional amount".
Ms. Miranda has asked $150,000 for general damages, and $100,000 for punitive, exemplary and aggravated damages.
Based on what Ms. Cusipag said of Saludares as a "soon to be a practicing lawyer", that article was actually dated, which means it's resurrected from an old file. When it was first published Saludares was a paralegal representing clients who were supposedly victimized by Ms. Miranda.
As a paralegal, Saludares engaged in name-calling, labeling Ms. Miranda "the summa cum laude of scammers in Toronto" even though she was cleared of all charges lodged by Crown prosecutors. (Full story at: https://filwebchannelmagazine.blogspot.com/2019/12/liwayway-miranda-aka-lily-hammer-gets.html and video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QprwiFQiLjs&t=10s).
In fact, he did not exactly have a sterling reputation. The Law Society of Ontario has cited him for professional misconduct in 2019. The summary decision reads:
(Full text at: https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onlst/doc/2019/2019onlsth12/2019onlsth12.html)
SALUDARES – Professional Misconduct – Findings and Penalty – Facilitating Fraud, Failing to Comply with Client Verification Requirements, Acting Outside Scope – The Paralegal entered an agreed statement of facts and admitted that he committed professional misconduct as alleged when he accepted a retainer to collect a purported debt of over $500,000 in circumstances where he ought to have known that the client was engaged in fraud – Joint penalty submission for three-month suspension and $5,000 in costs with two years to pay accepted as reasonable – Although there had been significant neglect of duty and a substantial fraud in the amount of $434,764, the respondent was a new licensee, remorseful and had immediately reported the matter to police upon realizing the cheques were fraudulent and fully co-operated with the Law Society.
Ms. Cusipag wrote that Ms. Miranda, who also goes by the name Lily Hammer, is a "notorious alleged scammer who up to this time is still hunted by victims to serve court documents".
In that same article, Ms. Cusipag claimed without proof that, and I quote, "Saludares is one of the defamation victims of Lily Hammer".
On the other hand, Ms. Miranda's lawyer said starting in February 2020, Ms. Cusipag and Balita published articles and statements "falsely accusing - expressly and by implication - Ms. Miranda of fraud, scams, swindling, racketeering, 'faked investing, being a 'Scammer', credit card theft, forgery, blackmail, threats, providing licensed services without licenses, etc.".
Those statements tagged as "initial defamatory publications" are false and defamatory, Ms. Miranda's lawyer said.
Ms. Miranda's lawyer said Ms. Cusipag and Balita are "repeat offenders," citing as examples "a consistent practice of publishing false allegations of fraud against reputable individuals". (Video and full story at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NGQX-SucJ4).
In one of the cases, Ms. Cusipag was found guilty of criminal contempt of court and sentenced to 21 days in prison. She was released after serving 13 days. (Full story at: https://filwebchannelmagazine.blogspot.com/2020/10/contempt-of-court-leads-to-21-day-jail.html
In the "statement of defense", Saludares said Ms. Miranda's claims "are purely designed to harass the defendants and to shut or stop their newspaper from informing the public about the alleged irregular acts of the plaintiff".
Further, he said her claim "was instituted . . . to serve as an escape goat (sic) or use the same in hope to clean her already tainted reputation so she can perpetuate her business . . . " Then he repeated parts of Ms. Cusipag's published article.
Saludares said lawsuits like Miranda's allege defamation "in order to curtail fair criticism by media-defendants - known as SLAPP - should not be permitted but must be dismissed outrightly by the court with damages".
He is seeking on behalf of his clients both partial and substantial indemnity costs "for instituting a baseless and unmeritorious claim" against Ms. Cusipag and Balita. (Copyright 2023. All Rights Reserved).
No comments:
Post a Comment