Steele v. Goodman

• Decision Date: 31 March 2019
• Docket Number: Civil Action No. 3:17cv601
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Virginia
• Parties: Robert David STEELE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Jason GOODMAN, et al., Defendants.

382 F.Supp.3d 403

Robert David STEELE, et al., Plaintiffs,

v.Jason GOODMAN, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 3:17cv601

United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division.

Signed March 31, 2019

Steven Scott Biss, Charlottesville, VA, for Plaintiff.

D. George Sweigert, Mesa, AZ, pro se.

Jason Goodman, New York, NY, pro se.

Terry Catherine Frank, Kaufman & Canoles PC (Richmond), Richmond, VA, Richard Johan Conrod, Jr., Kaufman & Canoles PC, Norfolk, VA, for Defendant.

Susan A. Lutzke, Ft. Collins, CO, pro se

MEMORANDUM OPINION

M. Hannah Lauck, United States District Judge

This matter comes before the Court on five motions: (1) Defendant Patricia A. Negron's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim ("Negron's Motion to Dismiss"),¹ (ECF No. 47); (2) Defendant Jason Goodman's "Special Motion to Dismiss the Complaint Under the VA Anti-Slapp Statute" ("Goodman's Motion to Dismiss"),² (ECF No. 45); (3) Goodman's Motion to Sever,³ (ECF No. 46); (4) Goodman's Motion for Leave to Substitute Corrected Ghost Writing Form (the "Ghost Writing Motion"),⁴ (ECF No. 71); and, (5) non-party D. George Sweigert's Motion to Intervene (the "Motion to Intervene"),⁵ (ECF No. 73).⁶ The Court also considers various non-party filings before it.

The matters are ripe for disposition. The Court dispenses with oral argument because the materials before it adequately present the facts and legal contentions, and argument would not aid the decisional process. The Court exercises jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332.⁷ For the reasons that follow, the Court will deny in part and grant in part Negron's Motion to Dismiss; deny Goodman's Motion to Dismiss; deny the Motion to Sever; grant the Ghost Writing Motion; and take the Motion to Intervene under advisement. Additionally, the Court will strike several non-party filings from the record.

I. Procedural and Factual Background

A. Procedural Background

On September 1, 2017, Plaintiffs filed their original Complaint (the "Original Complaint") against Jason Goodman, Patricia A. Negron, and "Queen Tut, a woman believed to be known as Carla A. Howell." (Original Compl. 1, ECF No. 1.) Goodman, proceeding pro se , filed an Answer (the "Original Answer"),⁸ (ECF No. 14), and Negron, by counsel, filed a Motion to Dismiss (the "Original Motion to Dismiss"), (ECF No. 21). Steele opposed the Original Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 24), and Negron replied, (ECF No. 29).

On January 23, 2018, Plaintiffs requested entry of default as to "Queen Tut a/k/a Susan A. Lutzke." (ECF No. 30.) Because the Original Complaint did not name as a defendant "Susan A. Lutzke," the Court denied Plaintiffs' request for entry of default. (See Mar. 9, 2018 Order, ECF No. 35.) On March 25, 2018, Plaintiffs moved to amend their Original Complaint, (ECF No. 36), and on April 11, 2018, the Court granted the motion, (ECF No. 38).

On April 13, 2018, Plaintiffs filed the Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 39.) The Amended Complaint names three defendants: Jason Goodman, Patricia A. Negron, and "Susan A. Lutzke a/k/a/ ‘Queen Tut’ " (collectively, "Defendants"). (Am. Compl. 1, ECF No. 39.) Plaintiffs state eight counts against each defendant as follows:

Count I: Defamation per se (the defamation claim);

Count II: Insulting words, in violation of Virginia Code § 8.01-45⁹ (the insulting words claim);

Count III: Business conspiracy, in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-499¹⁰ and Virginia Code § 18.2-500¹¹ (the statutory conspiracy claim);

Count VI: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress;

Count VII: Personal trespass by computer in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-152.7¹² and computer harassment in violation of Virginia Code § 18.2-152.7:1¹³ (the computer claim);

Count VIII: Unauthorized use of name and picture in violation of Virginia Code § 8.01-40¹⁴ (the unauthorized use claim); and,

Count IX: Permanent injunction.

Plaintiffs seek $ 6,000,000 in compensatory damages; $ 18,000,000 as "[t]hree-fold [d]amages in accordance with § 18.2-500" of the Virginia Code; $ 350,000 in punitive damages; prejudgment and postjudgment interest; and attorney's fees and costs. (Am. Compl. 96.)

In response to the Amended Complaint, Goodman filed Goodman's Motion to Dismiss and the Motion to Sever. On the same day, Goodman filed an Answer.¹⁵ (ECF No. 44.) Negron filed Negron's Motion to Dismiss. Lutzke did not respond to the Amended Complaint and has not made an appearance of any kind.¹⁶ Plaintiffs responded in opposition to Goodman's Motion to Dismiss and Goodman replied. Plaintiffs also responded in opposition to the Motion to Sever. Goodman did not file a reply, and the time to do so has expired. Finally, Plaintiffs responded in opposition to Negron's Motion to Dismiss and Negron replied.

On September 3, 2018, Plaintiffs requested entry of default as to Lutzke. (ECF No. 65.) On September 6, 2018, the Clerk entered default as to Lutzke. (ECF No. 66.)

Various non-parties have also submitted documents in this matter. George D. Sweigert, a non-party proceeding pro se ,¹⁷ has filed seven declarations.¹⁸ (ECF Nos. 51, 54, 55, 56, 58, 59, 60.) Sweigert also filed two Notices of Change of Address, (ECF No. 63, 67), and a Notice of Related Litigation, (ECF No. 68). On February 19, 2019, Sweigert filed a "Notice of Motion to Intervene," (ECF No. 72), and then, on the same day, filed the Motion to Intervene,¹⁹ (ECF No. 73). Goodman opposed the Motion to Intervene. Sweigert subsequently sent several letters to the Clerk's Office. (ECF Nos. 75, 77.) On March 18, 2019, Sweigert filed a "Notice of Intent to File an Amended Motion," (ECF No. 81), but he has not filed any amended motion to date. In the interest of judicial efficiency, the Court will order Sweigert to file an Amended Motion to Intervene, should he still wish to do so.²⁰ On March 29, 2019, Sweigert filed a document titled "Preliminary Notification to the Government of Canada." (ECF No. 84.)

Additionally, on March 15, 2019, non-party Jacqulyn Weaver²¹ filed a Declaration.²² (ECF No. 79.) On March 15, 2019, non-party Dean Fougere²³ filed a "General Affidavit."²⁴ (ECF No. 80.) On March 18, 2019, non-party Steve Outtrim²⁵ filed a "Statement in Response to" Goodman's Response opposing Sweigert's Motion to Intervene.²⁶ (ECF No. 82.) Finally, on March 29, 2019, non-party Kevin Marsden²⁷ filed a "Statement in Response to" Goodman's Response opposing Sweigert's Motion to Intervene.²⁸ (ECF No. 83.) The Court will strike the filings that Weaver, Fougere, Outtrim, and Marsden submitted. See Kimberlin , 2014 WL 12680738 at *1.

B. Summary of Allegations in the Complaint ²⁹

This action arises out of a series of allegedly defamatory statements that Defendants made against Plaintiffs beginning on June 15, 2017. (Am. Compl. 20.) The Court first provides context about the relevant parties to the action, followed by a summary of Defendants' actions and statements.

1. Plaintiffs: Steele and the Earth Intelligence Network

Steele describes a long list of professional accomplishments, presenting himself as a former Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA") operations officer, a former civil servant, and the holder of various advanced degrees. (Am. Compl. 6.) Steele works to "redirect[ ] the craft of intelligence away from spies and secrecy enabling war and waste towards open sources and methods favorable to peace and prosperity." (Id. 8.) In support of this work, Steele formed and operated a company³⁰ that ultimately helped draft the "NATO Open Source Intelligence Handbook."³¹ (Id. ) Steele asserts, without elaboration, that "[f]or over twenty (20) years, [Steele] has dedicated himself to teaching individuals and organizations about the value of holistic analytics, true cost economics, and Open Source Everything Engineering." (Id. 7.) Steele "was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize" based on this work. (Id. 8.)

In 2006, Steele founded Earth Intelligence Network ("EIN"), a Virginia 501(c)(3) not-for-profit corporation, and Plaintiff in this action. (Id. 9.) "The original purpose and long-term focus of Earth Intelligence Network is to teach citizens the urgency of demanding holistic analytics, true cost economics, and Open Source Everything Engineering (OSEE) as the foundation for enlightened self-governance." (Id. 9.) In order to fulfill this purpose, EIN started the #UNRIG (sometimes UNRIG) project, "an educational campaign to communicate to all citizens the possibility of an ethical, legal, non-violent restoration of integrity to the United States Government." (Id. ) Plaintiffs describe the #UNRIG campaign as

a legitimate full-time effort to unrig the system, "to restore integrity and truth to governance, with the informed will and wisdom of We the People at its heart", and "to enjoy a transparent government by 2022, that operates with honesty, respecting our planet and the human spirit, so that we may create a healthy, prosperous America rooted in truth with peace as our shared condition[.]"

(Id. 87–88 (quotations in original without attribution).) In support of this mission, Plaintiffs "acquired and professionally wrapped an RV, and began a national tour of the [c]ountry in furtherance of the ‘Summer of Peace’ campaign."³² (Id. 86.)

Public donations fund the #UNRIG campaign, and EIN "is fully transparent and accountable to its donors." (Id. 9.) Plaintiffs aver they "account[ ] for every penny spent in a budget that was posted online." (Id. 86 (providing a weblink).) Using the donations, Plaintiffs "actively promote[ ] the mission of #UNRIG and communicate[ ] with all donors." (Id. )

2. Defendants: Goodman, Negron, and Lutzke

According to Plaintiffs, Goodman operates "various social media properties" under the name "Crowdsource The Truth" or "CSTT."³³ (Am. Compl. 11.) Plaintiffs quote Goodman, without attribution, describing CSTT as "an independent news organization dedicated to truth in media and integrity in government. Our process is driven by a unique, open source fact checking ‘truth engine’ that has been described as a combination of...