Falsely Claiming to Be an Insurer Can be Criminal To Sue for Business Disparagement Evidence is Required Post 4951, Posted on December 17, 2024 by Barry Zalma Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/falsely-claiming-insurer-can-criminal-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-3bwrc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4950 posts. See the full video at and at Plaintiff Route App, Inc.’s (“Route”) moved the USDC to Dismiss two counterclaims asserted by OrderProtection.com, Inc. (“OrderProtection”). In Route App, Inc. v. Orderprotection.Com, Inc.; Julian Wilson, et al, No. 2:23cv606 DAK, United States District Court, D. Utah (December 9, 2024) found no evidence supporting a claim of business disparagement or business defamation. BACKGROUND This case involves a dispute between Route, a post-purchase shipping insurance provider, and a competitor, OrderProtection. In its Complaint, Route alleges that OrderProtection and several of Route’s former employees misappropriated trade secrets to create a competing business. In response to Route’s Complaint, OrderProtection filed an Answer and Counterclaims, asserting four causes of action: (1) Unfair Competition in Violation of the Lanham Act; (2) Defamation Per Se/Defamation/Business Disparagement; (3) Tortious Interference with Existing and Prospective Economic Relations; and (4) Negligent Misrepresentation. The facts pertaining to OrderProtection’s claim for “Defamation/Defamation Per Se/Business Disparagement” are essentially that Route employees have allegedly told OrderProtection customers and potential customers that they should work with Route instead of OrderProtection because Route is a “legal insurance provider” and OrderProtection is not. OrderProtection argued that Route is not a licensed insurance company and that, at best, Route affiliates with an insurance producer to procure its own insurance coverage (which does not benefit customers or merchants). More importantly both Route and OrderProtection in essence both self-fund the warranty protection they provide, and thus a customer is no better off with Route’s protection package than with OrderProtection’s competitive offering. DISCUSSION Specifically, while OrderProtection’s Opposition Memorandum does not explicitly state that it conceded its defamation and defamation per se claims, OrderProtection never addresses Route’s argument that it could not properly maintain these causes of action in the context of this case. Even if OrderProtection had not conceded these claims, it failed to establish that these claims are viable in the context of this case. Further, OrderProtection made no argument that Utah law recognizes a “hybrid” cause of action for “Defamation Per Se/Defamation/Business Disparagement,” wherein a business disparagement claim may be analyzed using defamation or defamation per se case law rather than case law pertaining to a business disparagement claim. Business Disparagement The parties agree that to state a claim for business disparagement (sometimes called injurious falsehood), OrderProtection must allege (1) falsity of the statement made; (2) malice by the party making the statement; and (3) special damages. According to Route, while OrderProtection has made allegations of lost customers, it has not named specific individuals, nor has it alleged with particularity any financial losses, which is required under Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court declined to recognize a “business disparagement per se” cause of action in which special damages need not be alleged, and it declined to recognize a business disparagement claim that relies on a statement that is “false by implication,” which is a concept that has been recognized in defamation cases. Route’s Motion to Dismiss was granted and OrderProtection’s claims for defamation and defamation per se were dismissed with prejudice. Its claim for business disparagement was dismissed without prejudice, and OrderProtection may file a Motion for Leave to Amend by January 10, 2025, if it is able to allege a proper business disparagement claim, as discussed above. ZALMA OPINION Two businesses claiming to be issuers of insurance who were not licensed insurers claimed to be victims of disparagement by the other. Customers, because of the various claims shifted from one party to the other who, contrary to their claims, were self funding what they alleged was insurance of shipments of goods. The court in a Solomon-like decision ignored the fact that both claimed to be insurers when they were not and used the false claims to take over clients. Both lost and the court gave OrderProtection the attempt to state a business disparagement claim implying that the court did not believe OrderProtection would be able to plead a viable cause of action. The State of Utah Department of Insurance should consider this case. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk

I'm 74 years old. I have a Missouri drivers license that I use when I vote. I can't figure out why some folks feel this is unfair. https://stjosephpost.com/posts/b5c4e847-6643-4b61-9140-8a391802904f God Bless America, God Save The Republic.

Life Is Unfair, But God Is Fair – Hope from the Book of Job | Cliffe Knechtle #motivation #jesus https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M91IxJdlAjM

...IS GOD "UNFAIR"??!!... https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JTi6iz0GSPg

Harris Accepts Debate Invite From Friendly CNN WITHOUT an Opponent? "Vice President Kamala Harris has accepted CNN’s invitation to debate Donald Trump for a second time ahead of the November election — despite the latter’s insistence that he doesn’t see a “need” to face-off again...Trump has repeatedly accused the moderators of the Sept. 10 ABC News debate of sabotaging his attempts to refute Harris — and even said he would refuse to debate Harris a second time under the same circumstances." And who would moderate this debate, Bernie Sanders and the corpse of Chairman Mao? Trump would have to have lost his mind to want to give the mainstream media complex another shot at running interference for Harris. The simple fact of the matter is this: Harris's performance in the last debate garnered her no significant bump, even with ABC News providing an unfair advantage. In fact, it created more questions about her refusal to provide any substantive information on her policy than it cleared up, furthering the reality-based perception that she is an empty suit, fully unprepared to be the president. So, sorry, Mr. Plouffe, take your debate invitation and introduce it to your anus. Until your candidate sits down with unfriendly interviewers who will present challenging questions beyond "what's your favorite color," you and your 30% of Democrats that wish the bullets hit Trump can suck it. #KamalaHarris #CNN #Debate #Trump #Democrats #GOP #Election2024

HARRIS ACCEPTS DEBATE INVITE FROM FRIENDLY CNN WITHOUT AN OPPONENT "Vice President Kamala Harris has accepted CNN’s invitation to debate Donald Trump for a second time ahead of the November election — despite the latter’s insistence that he doesn’t see a “need” to face-off again...Trump has repeatedly accused the moderators of the Sept. 10 ABC News debate of sabotaging his attempts to refute Harris — and even said he would refuse to debate Harris a second time under the same circumstances." And who would moderate this debate, Bernie Sanders and the corpse of Chairman Mao? Trump would have to have lost his mind to want to give the mainstream media complex another shot at running interference for Harris. The simple fact of the matter is this: Harris's performance in the last debate garnered her no significant bump, even with ABC News providing an unfair advantage. In fact, it created more questions about her refusal to provide any substantive information on her policy than it cleared up, furthering the reality-based perception that she is an empty suit, fully unprepared to be the president. So, sorry, Mr. Plouffe, take your debate invitation and introduce it to your anus. Until your candidate sits down with unfriendly interviewers who will present challenging questions beyond "what's your favorite color," you and your 30% of Democrats that wish the bullets hit Trump can suck it. https://substack.com/profile/129788551-frank-salvato/note/c-69971631 #KamalaHarris #CNN #Debate #Trump #Democrats #GOP #Election2024

https://medforth.biz/germany-migrant-living-illegally-in-germany-announces-knife-attack-at-funfair/

Donald J. Trump TOTAL EXONERATION! It is clear that the Supreme Court’s Brilliantly Written and Historic Decision ENDS all of Crooked Joe Biden’s Witch Hunts against me, including the WHITE HOUSE AND DOJ INSPIRED CIVIL HOAXES in New York. All of these Unfair Charges represent the WORST level of Election Interference ever seen in our Country’s long and storied History. It must be understood, that I was Totally and Completely Innocent from the beginning of this Giant and Highly Illegal Scam, long before the Supreme Court’s Decision was released. The impact of the Immunity Ruling is a loud and clear signal for Justice in the United States. I AM PROUD TO BE AN AMERICAN!

Fair or Unfair? Does this mean some foreign tranny wins the gold?

🇺🇸 ISRAEL VS GAZA 🇺🇸 ⚫ At least 33,970 people have been killed and 76,770 wounded in Israeli attacks on Gaza since October 7. The death toll in Israel from Hamas’s October 7 attacks stands at 1,139 with dozens of captives held in Gaza. ⚫ Health workers have recovered at least 30 bodies buried in front of al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, according to the enclave’s Government Media Office. ⚫ The US again exercised its veto power in the UN Security Council to block Palestine’s widely supported bid for full UN membership, a move the Palestinian presidency says is “unfair, unethical and unjustifiable”.