Shirley Sherrod Sues Andrew Breitbart Over Video

Shirley Sherrod has filed a lawsuit against Andrew Breitbart over a video released by the conservative personality that lead to her ouster as an official at the USDA.

Breitbart was served on Saturday at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), according to the New York Times: "In the suit, which was filed in Washington on Friday, Ms. Sherrod says the video has damaged her reputation and prevented her from continuing her work."

The video first gained widespread public attention when it was posted on Breitbart's BigGovernment.com. The two-minute, 38-second clip was widely received as an admission by Sherrod, who is African American, that she had discriminated against a white farmer. Under immediate pressure from the Obama administration, Sherrod resigned from her position as the USDA's director of rural development in Georgia.

When a full 43-minute copy of the video surfaced, additional context turned the story into one of reconciliation. Sherrod had actually saved the man's farm and started a lifelong friendship. The NAACP, which publicly condemned Sherrod's speech shortly after it was posted on BigGovernment.com, soon issued a retraction and said that they were "snookered."

The White House also begged for forgiveness and offered her a "unique opportunity." Sherrod declined the offer to return to the Agriculture Department.

A statement issued on his website says Breitbart "categorically rejects the transparent effort to chill his constitutionally protected free speech and, to reiterate, looks forward to exercising his full and broad discovery rights." The statement also says that Larry O'Connor, the head of Breitbart.tv, was named in the suit.

Comments

[Onertwo19]

09:25 PM on 04/08/2011

Fox News is a disgrace. They knew Breitbart's content is heavily edited and deceptive, but they when ahead and aired the story anyway. Fox is not journalism.

[Hydra8]

11:45 PM on 02/22/2011

Defamation is easy to prove all right, she lost her job within hours of the release of the intentionally edited excerpts. Damage is easy to prove-again people thought immediately and it was reported by all national networks that she was the person who spoke the words in that excerpt. She was both a private individual with her own personal reputation and she was a public figure doing a public sector high level position working for the USDA. Yes she had rights in both definitions of protection against defamation. Yes Braitbart intentionally left the video on his website which does exhibit malice and his enjoyment of the publicity it brought his website. His gain is at the expense of her reputation and it appears as an open and shut case. I hear settlement before any trial is the only way out, and it should be very costly, after all he has a history of doing this type of gotcha cheap journalism. Braitbart was involved in the Acorn sting operation.

[thegreenhornet]

09:15 AM on 02/19/2011

I hope he is collectible and I hope she bankrupted him. It will match his moral bankruptcy!

[Changeling]

02:52 PM on 02/17/2011

I laugh at the NAACP. They were not "snookered."

They just did what everyone else did: take the video at face value without any investigation.....when they should have been among the FIRST to be subjecting it to scruitiny.

[InLosAngeles]

01:19 PM on 02/17/2011

Thank God for Shirley we don't use the English rule in our courts.

[gallonjug]

04:01 PM on 02/17/2011

Judge:THE WORD IS "YOUR" not "YOU'RE".
tulane-grad: sorry, You're Honor.
Judge: that's it. Escort this maran out of my courtroom.
Bailiff: where you talking to me, sir?

[ObamAtomic]

12:31 AM on 02/18/2011

Judge- Counselor,you are the order,this court found you inane and obtrusive,take seat!

[ObamAtomic]

01:00 PM on 02/19/2011

*out

[ObamAtomic]

01:33 AM on 02/17/2011

"If the plaintiff is a public official, public figure or limited-purpose public figure, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant acted with actual malice with clear and convincing evidence"

Being a public official is not an impediment to prevail as a Plaintiff.

Elements of Defamation

"To prove that a written or verbal statement is defamatory­, it is sufficient for a plaintiff to prove that at least one person who received the communicat­ion believed that it was detrimenta­l to the plaintiff'­s reputation­. A message that decreases respect for the plaintiff or confidence in the plaintiff or causes disparagin­g, hostile, or disagreeab­le opinions about the plaintiff is detrimenta­l to the plaintiff. Even a message that is intended as a joke may be defamatory if at least one person believes it to be serious"

[jackbutler5555]

11:45 AM on 02/19/2011

Defamation would be easy enough to prove.  A more difficult issue is, is it actionable? 

The complaint claims he didn't take it off his site when he knew it was false.  Does that establish malice?  Maybe.  Case law has been pretty liberal with the media. 

The definition of malice in the lay world differs, of course.

[ObamAtomic]

12:59 PM on 02/19/2011

We will see,he maybe will get what he deserve.

[murphysgirl]

11:15 PM on 02/16/2011

I hope Shirley can wipe that devious smirk off of Breitbart's face after she wipes the floor with him..How he walks around with no shame is just ridiculous..

[demimckingwoodtx]

07:53 PM on 02/16/2011

I hope you get everything this fool owns!

[Boopsie2008]

07:51 PM on 02/16/2011

Very, very smart of Sherrod to go with Kirkland & Ellis.

Breitbart is toast.

[deschl]

07:40 PM on 02/16/2011

YOU GO GIRL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[arneader]

07:10 PM on 02/16/2011

GO SHIRLEY!

[Boopsie2008]

07:48 PM on 02/16/2011

My sentiments exactly!

[GwenElle]

09:07 PM on 02/16/2011

No, I don't smell a rat, but I do notice a rather obvious display of paranoid neurosis -- YOURS!

[ObamAtomic]

12:15 AM on 02/17/2011

Your rant is irrelevant to Brainbarf defamation against Mrs Sherrod.

[Nutcase]

06:54 PM on 02/16/2011

Has anyone else noted that Andrew isn't all that breit?

[Boopsie2008]

07:55 PM on 02/16/2011

wOOt! Fanned and faved!

[glomtt]

04:45 PM on 02/16/2011

I hope she takes him to the cleaners!

[Boopsie2008]

07:56 PM on 02/16/2011

x 5,000,000. Dollars, that is!