A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry
nm
This is all public information, so I hope the Moderator will not delete this. Anyone can access this information from a government website.
Hopefully this will cause some posters to think twice before they type unsubstantiated comments about their present or former employer because they are mad at them right at that moment. Once it is out there, it could be there forever.
In case you do not remember the situation (or for people who never heard of it), TransTech took exception to some posts on MTStars by former (possibly even current) employees. They were able to identify one person by legal name, but also identified 5 posters by their “monikers” that they had not yet identified by name. The lawsuit was, therefore, against a total of 6 people.
Date filed: 07/08/2009
Date terminated: 08/25/2010
The lawsuit was filed on August 8, 2009 against defendants:
X X (named defendant)
and
Jane Does 1 – 5
Their claim was:
The defendant(s) “published false or defamatory statements on a networking website in 2009.” “Jane Does 1 – 5 have posted on the MT Stars Internet Web site…” “These defamatory posts have affected TransTech’s reputation in the industry and have damaged TransTech financially as well as by causing prospective employees not to pursue job opportunities with TransTech.”
Over a year later (and approximately 21 filings between the two attorneys), the final outcome was:
“TransTech and defendant X X have reached a resolution of the issues between and among themselves. Therefore, TransTech desires to dismiss its claims against X X with prejudice to re-filing and desires to dismiss its claims against the Jane Doe defendants 1 through 5 without prejudice to re-filing.”
In case you are not sure what the difference is between being dismissed “with prejudice” as opposed to “without prejudice,” here are the definitions:
WITH prejudice: Premature termination of a court case under which a plaintiff is prevented from refilling it in the future on the same grounds.
So, the lawsuit against the known Poster can never be filed again. However, if TransTech ever finds out the legal names of the other 5 Jane Doe posters, they can file a lawsuit against them, until the statute of limitations expires.
Pretty sad if you ask me. TransTech, I am sure, has attorneys on retainer, but they still wasted a lot of time for, basically, nothing. And, I image, even if X X had a relative who is an attorney or got a great fee reduction, it had to cost her some money and anxiety over that year.
Just a cautionary tale to watch what you post on public message boards. You never know when a company or even another person might decide to make an example of you. Usually, they can afford it financially – most of us (dare I say ALL of us who post on this board) cannot.
Please think before you type.
Just my personal opinion.
**********************
UPDATE: Information/link provided by poster(s):
Moderator
The documents are public information and can be found on the PACER website:
https://pcl.uscourts.gov/view?rid=7ztYJtoVTlZ2POLrJtGNj9MqKvr3LFKyZOIoM4Cg&page=1
4:09-cv-02637 Transtech Medical Solutions LLC v. Williams et al Gray H. Miller, presiding Date filed: 08/14/2009 Date terminated: 08/25/2010 Date of last filing: 08/25/2010
History
Doc.
No. Dates Description
1
Filed: 08/14/2009
Entered: 08/18/2009
Docket Text Notice of Removal
Filed & Entered: 08/18/2009
Docket Text Filing Fee Received
2
Filed & Entered: 09/08/2009
Docket Text Order
3
Filed & Entered: 09/08/2009
Docket Text Order for Initial Conference and Disclosure
4
Filed: 09/09/2009
Entered: 09/10/2009
Terminated: 02/25/2010
Docket Text Motion to Dismiss
7
Filed: 09/16/2009
Entered: 09/17/2009
Docket Text Statement
5
Filed & Entered: 09/17/2009
Terminated: 09/17/2009
Docket Text Motion for Extension of Time
6
Filed & Entered: 09/17/2009
Docket Text Order on Motion for Extension of Time
8
Filed & Entered: 09/23/2009
Docket Text Certificate of Interested Parties
9
Filed: 09/28/2009
Entered: 09/29/2009
Docket Text Certificate of Interested Parties
10
Filed & Entered: 10/01/2009
Docket Text JointDiscovery/Case Management Plan
11
Filed & Entered: 10/05/2009
Docket Text Scheduling Order
12
Filed & Entered: 10/07/2009
Docket Text Response to Motion
13
Filed & Entered: 10/07/2009
Docket Text Proposed Order
14
Filed & Entered: 10/08/2009
Docket Text Initial Disclosures
15
Filed & Entered: 10/12/2009
Docket Text Reply to Response to Motion
16
Filed & Entered: 02/12/2010
Docket Text ADR Status Report
17
Filed & Entered: 02/25/2010
Docket Text Order on Motion to Dismiss
18
Filed & Entered: 03/12/2010
Docket Text Answer to State Court Petition/Notice of Removal
19
Filed & Entered: 08/13/2010
Docket Text Initial Disclosures
20
Filed & Entered: 08/25/2010
Terminated: 08/25/2010
Docket Text Motion to Dismiss
21
Filed: 08/25/2010
Entered: 08/26/2010
Docket Text Order on Motion to Dismiss
@Moderator
I used the REPLY BY EMAIL to send you the information.
If you need other information, I can send that also.