Mike Lindell and Mai Pillow are trying to dismiss Dominion’s defamation proceedings again.
They want the judge in the Court of Appeals to reconsider that another judge refused to dismiss the proceedings.
Dominion claimed $ 1.6 billion in damages for the election conspiracy theory.
Attorneys at Mike Lindell’s Pillow Company are making yet another effort to dismiss the $ 1.6 billion defamation proceeding from Dominion Voting Systems.
Submission to court on TuesdayThe lawyer asked the judge overseeing the case if the Court of Appeals could review the legal standards that would allow Dominion to proceed with the proceedings.First company Proceedings against Lindel and My Pillow in February, Because Lindel promoted a false conspiracy theory about the role of election technology companies in the 2020 elections.
According to Dominion, the CEO was partially pushing the theory to promote the sale of MyPillow products. Lindel continues to push the wrong theory, Hosted a “symposium” on them Early August.
Lindell and My Pillow lawyers have been appointed as separate defendants and have attempted to dismiss the proceedings. Insist The CEO’s allegations were made as part of political discourse and were not considered defamatory.However, Judge Karl J. Nichols of the U.S. District Court said Dominion’s proceedings against them, and Parallel to Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani, Who propelled other false theories about Dominion- May move forward..
In the latest court filing, a lawyer representing My Pillow asked Nichols if he could bring some of their allegations to the Court of Appeals. Lawyers Nathan Lewis and Andrew D. Parker want the High Court to consider whether Nichols has applied appropriate legal standards in dismissing My Pillow’s motion to dismiss the proceedings.
they Arguing Dominion is a government contractor involved in conducting elections, so it should be held on the same basis as “civil servants.” Lewis and Parker pointed out the case law they say shows that the proceedings filed by civil servants must reach higher standards of evidence than Nichols applied in his case.
“To allow a central civil servant to file a legal objection, we need to show even more extraordinary recklessness.
“Core government functions that are the subject of ongoing divisive national debate,” said Lewis and Parker. “To protect the rights of the First Amendment, the courts have made important government obligations. We must demand the highest level of evidence of actual malicious intent before the performing officials can continue. We will take legal action against critics. “
Lewis and Parker decide to appeal Dominion Other defamation proceedings, Fox News, Newsmax, One America News, and for former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne.
Read the original article Business insider