Highly litigious Larry Klayman has filed yet another lawsuit, this time against City Pages and the Phoenix New Times for libel after they reported on a magistrate judge’s conclusions that he may have touched his children inappropriately, conclusions that were included in a ruling on a custody dispute with his ex-wife. And he’s put out a press release about it.
Activist attorney Larry Klayman today announced filing a lawsuit in federal court here (Case 5:13-cv-00143-ACC-PRL) against City Pages of Minnesota and Phoenix New Times, charging that they defamed him by stating falsely that he inappropriately touched his children.
As alleged in the complaint, “The defendants in this lawsuit are ultra leftist publications who are maliciously using my children to harm me in retaliation for my legal representation of conservative clients fighting radical homosexual and pro illegal immigrant agendas.”
“To falsely use my young children to try to harm my clients and me is the lowest of the low and these ultra leftist publications and their reporters will pay a heavy legal price for doing so,” said Klayman.
“These companies and certain named reporters are being sued for defamation and defamation by inference under Florida law, for having widely published domestically and internationally false and misleading statements that I committed and was convicted of the crime of sexually abusing my own two children.”
Now I haven’t seen the articles from either of those publications, but I did write about this very subject in a post a few months ago. And I quoted the Ohio Court of Appeals ruling on the subject of the allegations made by his ex-wife against him. I didn’t accuse him of having touched his children inappropriately, and I have no idea whether he did. But that ruling at least indicates that the court found “competent, credible evidence” to support a lower court judge’s concerns in that regard.
Klayman claims that these allegations are false and were made by his wife to help her custody case and, for all I know, that may be true. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time that one party in a custody dispute made up false allegations. But it’s hardly libel or defamation to quote from a public legal document that indicates that a magistrate judge found such allegations credible, or to point out that he was held in contempt of court in those proceedings and ordered to pay over $300,000 in legal fees incurred by his ex-wife and back child support he owed.
As usual, the legal complaint he filed is sure to irritate the hell out of whatever judge is unlucky enough to get assigned the case because it’s filled with irrelevant political boilerplate. He wastes an inordinate amount of time claiming that the defendants in the suit are “radical pro-homosexual activists” who promote a “perverse radical gay, lesbian, transgender sexual orientation and lifestyle for children,” as though that had anything at all to do with whether they committed libel or not. It’s almost as if he failed legal writing in law school or something, and he’s been hammered for this enough times that you’d think he would have learned his lesson by now. But this is why I call him the worst lawyer in America not named Mat Staver or Orly Taitz.