Trending
VIENNA – The defendant in a lawsuit alleging that reputational harm was caused because of false statements in a review published online earlier this year is pushing back.
Attorney Brian Bardwell of Speech Law LLC, on behalf of Julie Watson, filed a motion Thursday in Trumbull County Common Pleas Court for expedited relief dismissing claims against her made by Vienna-based Starr Manufacturing.
The motion, a special petition a defendant can file under the state’s anti-Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation laws, is the first instance of the state’s anti-SLAPP legislation being utilized in the county since Gov. Mike DeWine signed Senate Bill 237 into law in 2025, which established its framework.
The motion comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the company in August alleging that Watson “falsely and maliciously” made claims that the company had quality and manufacturing failures with multiple customers in a review posted to the company’s Google Business Profile in March.
The lawsuit states that state and county residents viewed, read and believed Watson’s allegations, and as a direct result, Starr Manufacturing has suffered significant reputational harm and special damages.
Watson’s motion for relief claims that, because the Google review covers a matter of public concern, claims based on it are subject to expedited review through the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, a model law drafted to protect individuals from SLAPPs, which automatically pauses discovery while the motion to dismiss is pending.
“…Plaintiff admits that the Google Review was posted on a publicly accessible website, and its contents related to matters of general interest to the public, particularly those members of the public who are in the market for the goods and services plaintiff offers,” the motion states, citing prior cases.
“If those potential clients are at risk of falling victim to ‘quality and manufacturing failures,’ that is a consumer-protection problem, which is ‘clearly a matter of public interest.'”
The motion states that because Starr Manufacturing cannot establish a prima facie case for each element of defamation, Watson is entitled to expedited dismissal.
A prima facie claim requires the show of a false and defamatory statement about the plaintiff published to a third party, with fault of negligence by the defendant that was either defamatory or caused special harm.
The claim notes that while it’s unclear whether Starr can produce evidence, it would be clear that it would fail on one of several elements, noting that there was no evidence the Google Review was a false statement of fact because the company’s own allegations and evidence demonstrate that it was a statement of opinion.
The claim states that Watson’s review was privileged, similar to precedent created by past rulings, noting that she has had many friends and family work in the oil and gas industry over the years and was concerned for their safety and the safety of other people, businesses and environments surrounding their worksites.
“Her interests therefore neatly overlap with those of the people in the market for plaintiff's products -- the natural audience of the Google Review -- who are presumably just as interested in protecting the safety of their own workers and equipment,” the claim states.
The claim also notes the state does not recognize or permit “defamation by implication.”