OBADIAH WILSON’S COURTROOM is packed again, even tighter than it was before. As the judge steps up to the bench, he stops to view the room, grumbles and shakes his head. “This is too much. If you don’t have a seat, please exit now. All you people standing, you’ll have to leave. It’s a fire hazard, not to mention a distraction to the legal process in my courtroom. There is serious business going on in here and it’s not for your entertainment.” There are loud complaints as disgruntled standees file out the door.
When the last of the stragglers has exited, the clerk slams the gavel and calls out, “Case number 18-L-20998, Henryks v. Stein. Defendant Britta Stein’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint.” Sparks, in a light gray suit, tightly fitted, lavender shirt and multicolored tie, approaches the bench. His long black hair is combed back and gelled in place. He turns to nod at the remaining reporters. Judge Wilson looks down at Catherine and says, “All right, Ms. Lockhart, it’s your motion. I’ve read the briefs. I understand your position. Is there anything more you wish to add?”
Catherine knows the routine. She shakes her head. “No, your honor.”
“All right then, I’m ready to rule. As much as I’ve considered the arguments you’ve made—”
Sparks breaks in, “Just a minute, Judge. I would like to supplement my position at this time. I have something more to say.”
“Hmph,” Wilson scoffs. “I’m sure you do. Any opportunity to strut your stuff, am I right, Mr. Sparks?”
“I just want my opposition to Ms. Lockhart’s motion to be clear on the record,” Sparks says with a shrug.
Wilson lowers his eyes and sighs. “Has anyone ever told you that when a judge is leaning in your favor, it’s best to—”
“To shut up,” Sparks answers quickly with a snap of his fingers. “Are you leaning in my favor?”
Wilson exhales loudly and nods. “Ms. Lockhart, there is no possible way of construing ‘Nazi agent,’ ‘Nazi collaborator’ and ‘traitor” in any way but defamatory. They are incapable of innocent construction under any circumstances. While I considered your argument that ‘liar,’ ‘betrayer’ and ‘informer’ might carry some degree of ambiguity, or may under some circumstances be regarded as opinions, they are so closely connected to the other unambiguous defamatory phrases as to render them actionable.”
Now Catherine voices her opposition. “Your honor, Mr. Henryks is a public figure. He’s on TV all the time, he’s a well-known personality and he’s about to be inducted into a hall of fame. In such a case, he is inviting comments and opinions about him, even though some may be unfavorable.”
Sparks speaks up. “Nonsense! Mr. Henryks is only a public figure because the defendant has—” He stops abruptly as Judge Wilson is wagging his finger at him. “I know. I should shut up when I’m ahead.”
Wilson nods reluctantly. “One would think so. To the extent Mr. Henryks is now a center of attention and at the forefront of this particular public controversy, he is there because Mrs. Stein has put him there. He is there involuntarily.”
“He is being feted as a war hero,” Catherine argues, though she is now certain that her arguments are falling on deaf ears. “Surely that invites public discourse on his war activities.”
Wilson gives her a look that says I’d like to help you, but I can’t. “He did not thrust himself into the public arena, Ms. Lockhart; it was done by others. I rule that he is not a public figure.”
Catherine isn’t finished. “What about ‘liar’? Isn’t that a mere statement of opinion?”
Wilson lifts shoulders in a minor shrug. “I don’t see that it will make much difference in the grand scheme of things, but I’ll grant your motion to strike ‘liar’ from the complaint. Otherwise, as to all the other statements, your motion is denied.”
“Your honor,” says Sparks, “I would like—”
“That is my ruling, Mr. Sparks. In case you didn’t realize it, you have won this morning.”
“No sir, I wasn’t going to address the motion. I have two other concerns.”
Wilson shuts his eyes. “What are they, Mr. Sparks?”
“We all know what Ms. Lockhart is going to do now. She’s going to file an answer admitting that her client painted the words, and she’s going to file an affirmative defense, no doubt asserting that the defamatory remarks are privileged.”
“And you want me to order her to file her papers promptly, am I right?”
“Yes, sir; that’s the first part.”
“And?”
“I want you to order her to divulge to this court, right here and now, what evidence she will have to show that there is any truth to the wild assertions which will be made by her client in the affirmative defense. Right here. Right now. What evidence is she going to have to support such a pleading?”
Wilson has a perplexed look on his face. “Well, that’s not how the game is played, Mr. Sparks.”
Sparks puffs his chest; he is at center stage now, talking to a room of reporters as well as the judge. “If Ms. Lockhart has any proof, even the slightest scintilla of proof, from seventy-five years ago, that Mr. Henryks was a Nazi, I demand she come forward right now and disclose the evidence. She’ll have to do it eventually. Mrs. Stein has cast a stain upon my client, I submit to you, without a shred of evidence. I don’t know what bone she has to pick with Mr. Henryks, what ancient vendetta, but she has no proof to back up any of her wild insults, I guarantee it. If I’m wrong, then show it to me right now. It’s not fair for my client to live under the cloud of these heinous accusations when there is not a chance in hell that they will be proven. At this moment of his life, when he is about to be honored as a hero, he should be free of such baseless condemnation. Where is the proof? I demand it!”
“Hmm,” Wilson says. “Quite an oration, Mr. Sparks. I guess there’s a good reason that you have such a descriptive nickname. Of course, I’m not going to order any evidentiary showing at this time, and you know that. But I do see your point. There is a stain on Mr. Henryks’s reputation, at least temporarily. Whether that is his fault or not is a matter to be sorted out at a later time. But whether there is any evidentiary support for those statements is indeed a matter that concerns me at all times. I will caution you, Ms. Lockhart, if you file an affirmative defense asserting that the statements made by your client are true, you will need to plead exactly how and why such statements are true. Illinois is a fact-pleading state. I will not abide with a pleading full of conclusions. Each of Mrs. Stein’s statements, whether it’s ‘Nazi agent,’ ‘traitor’ or ‘Nazi collaborator,’ must be pleaded with specific facts. What did Henryks do? When did he do it? What did he say? To whom was it said? What facts make him a traitor? Or a collaborator? If you do not plead specific facts, I will dismiss your affirmative defense and grant judgment to the plaintiff. Are we clear?”
Catherine nods.
“I will give you thirty days to file your pleading which recites those specific facts. Court is adjourned.”