Evans v. Evans: Court Order Prohibiting “False and Defamatory” Information On Internet About Estranged Husband Is Prior Restraint

Here’s a link to that case in which the estranged wife was accused of posting “false and defamatory statements” about her soon to be ex-husband online. The husband asked for an injunction, which the trial court granted, but an appellate court found the injunction to be an unconstitutional prior restraint on free speech. “Because there has been no trial and no determination on the merits…, the court cannot prohibit [Linda]from making statements characterized only as “false and defamatory.”…This portion of the order is also invalid as unconstitutionally vague and overbroad. The injunction broadly prohibited Linda from publishing any defamatory comments about Thomas. This sweeping prohibition fails to adequately delineate which of Linda’s future comments might violate the injunction and lead to contempt of court….The fact that the court’s prohibition on publishing false materials applied only to speech on the Interhet does not affect our analysis. The courts have made clear that speech on the Internet is accorded the same First Amendment protection as speech on other forums.” As to whether the injunction was invalid with regard to its prohibition concerning the publication of confidential personal information, such a injunction requires careful balancing of the rights involved: the court said the order was not narrowly tailored and was vague and overbroad.

The case is Evans v. Evans, D051144, California Court of Appeal, 4th Appellate District, Division One (decided May 12, 2008).