We are privileged to offer services in the areas of litigation and arbitration.
Please review the descriptions below for a better understanding of the nature and scope of our services.
|
Our Rates: Legal
representation is expensive. We pride ourselves on counseling clients
to find the most cost-effective way to protect their rights, even if
that counseling ends up costing us business. If you are sued, you may
have insurance that will not only pay the cost of defending the suit,
but also satisfy a judgment entered against you. We will explore your
options with you, advise and assist you to try to achieve the best
results with the least financial impact. When defending lawsuits, we
typically make an hourly fee arrangement. Because we enjoy a small
firm’s lower overhead, our hourly rates are highly competitive,
especially for the level of skill and experience we bring to the table.
Our rates typically are 25% to 50% lower than large or boutique firm
lawyers who practice in the same areas of law but carry significant
overhead for offices, support staff and/or training and development of
junior lawyers. For certain qualified clients, we also offer discounts
off the regular hourly rate when billings are paid from a refundable
retainer maintained in our Trust account. We also employ legal tactics
that can ultimately shift the burden of costs and fees to plaintiffs
when the defense prevails in the suit. In those limited settings where
we are prosecuting claims for our clients (we do not represent
plaintiffs in defamation or invasion of privacy cases), we are usually
willing to discuss blended and/or contingent fee arrangements. [Back to Top]
|
Media Law:
We offer a wide range of legal services to publishers, broadcasters,
journalists, reporters, writers, bloggers, photographers, artists,
programmers, designers, filmmakers, and just about anyone else involved
in creating and/or distributing written, audio or visual content
through any medium, including newspapers, television and the Internet.
Such services fall within the general rubric of “media law” and include
the following:[Back to Top]
|
Defense of Defamation (libel or slander) and Invasion of Privacy claims“Sticks
and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.” That’s a
widely-known playground jingle, but in reality, people are sued all the
time for what they say, write or display about other people. Mr. Snyder
has successfully defended businesses and individuals (especially
journalists) against such claims for more than 25 years.Libel
and Slander (the former is written or broadcast defamation, the latter
is spoken defamation) are common law torts that to greater or lesser
extent have been codified in most American jurisdictions. Arcane common
law rules of presumption and privilege govern all such actions and in
many instances, the first amendment to the U. S. Constitution provides
an overlay of protection for speech about public officials, public
figures and/or matters of public interest or concern.Invasion of Privacy has been divided by legal commentators and the courts into four categories:
- Commercial Appropriation/Right of Publicity.
Ordinary folks bring such claims when they feel their image or likeness
(their “personal story”) has been used without permission or
compensation to make money for someone else. With varying degrees of
success, celebrities (and the entertainment lawyers who represent them)
have asserted a “right of publicity” to extract money from anyone who
would own, share, offer fair comment on or incorporate in their art any
suggestion of the celebrities persona or work. Non-commercial use of
others’ image or story is usually protected by state law or the U.S.
constitution. Even where uses are commercial, most who assert
misappropriation of their image have an overblown concept of their
value and even celebrities cannot defeat rights of artistic expression
protected by the first amendment.
- Intrusion. Even in our complex society, everyone
has—and wants all others to respect—their zone of privacy. Those who
believe their zone of privacy has been physically or technologically
invaded have and often seek recourse in the courts. Congress and state
legislatures have passed laws that restrict intrusion into private
property and communications, but most such laws as well as judge-made
(common) law concerning intrusion require an objective evaluation as to
whether a person complaining about intrusion had a “reasonable
expectation of privacy” in the place or actions invaded.
- Revelation of Private Facts. Disclosure of true, but
private facts, can give rise to invasion of privacy suits. The policy
behind such claims is that some information—though true—is nobody’s
business. Consent to disclosure and public interest or newsworthiness
are defenses to an invasion of privacy claim based on disclosure of
private facts.
- False Light. Originally conceived to redress
embarrassing publications of false flattery, many plaintiffs’ lawyers
have seized on this amorphous tort to avoid the many common law and
constitutional defenses to defamation claims. Many states do not permit
plaintiffs to make an end run around defamation law by merely
doubling-up to claim that a broadcast or publication has cast them in a
false light.
Competent defense of defamation or invasion of privacy
suits requires in-depth understanding and experience in navigating the
complicated twists, turns and overlays of statutory, common law and
constitutional defenses. David Snyder, this firm’s principal attorney,
co-authored Rediscovering Florida’s Common Law Defenses to Libel and
Slander, 11 Stetson L. Rev. 1 (1982), which has been cited by the
Florida Supreme Court and other appellate courts throughout the state
as an authority on defamation defenses. He has successfully defended
libel and privacy suits against publishers, broadcasters, journalists,
media businesses and privates individuals. Mr. Snyder also teaches
libel and privacy law to professional journalists throughout Florida as
a lecturer at the annual Reporter’s Workshop sponsored by the Florida
Bar and to future journalists as an adjunct professor of Communications
Law at the University of Tampa (2000-date), University of South
Florida-St. Petersburg (2006) and Florida Southern College (1999-2006).
[Back to Top]
|
Newsgathering and Pre-Publication Counseling.Many
of the lawsuits that arise out of information gathering and
distribution can be avoided (or at least more successfully defended)
with skilled legal counseling. The old adage “An Ounce of Prevention is
Worth a Pound of Cure” applies here. We help journalists uncover the
truth while obeying the law and using laws that grant access to
information about government as well as private businesses and
individuals. The Goal: To get the truth out to the public quickly with
the minimum risk of suit. Some sources ARE more reliable than others,
but that is an oversimplification. Some sources, if used properly, can
be relied upon without fear of successful legal retribution. We also
provide counseling to avoid problems with trademark and copyright
infringement as well as invasion of privacy claims. [Back to Top]
|
Freedom of Information, Public Records and “Sunshine Law”Florida
and federal laws grant the public access to government records and
actions. While the federal law is notoriously cumbersome, slow and
wrought with exceptions, it can still, for the patient reporter, enable
access to critical information of great public importance. Florida’s
“Sunshine Laws” on the other hand, provide a highly workable and
important tool to insure access to the decision-making processes of
government via Open Meeting Laws, and to uncover the “paper (and
increasing electronic) trails” that reveal the inner workings of
government. Our approach to assisting clients with access to government
information is to help our clients “do it yourself” in the initial
stages, then prosecute lawsuits to pry open the doors of government,
where warranted. [Back to Top]
|
Defending the Journalists’ Privilege/Subpoena Defense. We
provide counseling to journalists on the scope and reach of the
journalists’ privilege and how to negotiate with sources to protect
both source and journalist from legal troubles. When journalists are
subpoenaed, we help them limit or avoid entirely the requirement to
testify in deposition or in court. The U.S. Constitution and many
state statutes afford journalists a privilege to avoid testifying in
both criminal and civil court cases. The policy behind such laws is
that a journalist’s job is to gather and disseminate news and forcing a
journalist to be a testifying witness interferes with both of those
functions. Being called as a witness takes the journalist away from
gathering and disseminating news. When a journalist testifies, it is
for one party or another, which causes the journalist to appear to take
sides in a dispute, even if taking the stand is the last thing the
journalist wants to so. A journalist who appears to take sides and
help one party or harm another, won’t be trusted by sources in the
future and the flow of information from sources—through the
journalist—to the public is impeded. This problem is magnified in the
rare occasions when a journalist has promised to protect the identity
of the source from public exposure. Once a journalist “burns” a
source, that source and other potential sources will hesitate more than
twice before trusting the journalist with their secrets in the future. [Back to Top]
|
Trademark and Copyright Registration and CounselingComing soon![Back to Top]
|
Business Litigation for Business Entities and IndividualsComing soon![Back to Top]
|
Business Torts (Interference, Trade Secrets, Trademark and Tradedress)Coming soon![Back to Top]
|
Employment, Non-Compete and Non-Disclosure AgreementsComing soon![Back to Top]
|
Corporate, Partnership and Limited Liability Company Control and Management DisputesComing soon![Back to Top]
|
Professional Liability Defense (Accountants, Lawyers, etc.)Coming soon![Back to Top]
|
|
