Yelp May be Forced to Remove Defamatory Reviews

The California Supreme Court will consider a lawsuit that will determine whether San Francisco-based Yelp Inc. would be forced to remove negative reviews from its site, a move Yelp says could be “ripe for abuse.”

The court voted unanimously Wednesday to take up an appeal by Yelp of a lower court ruling, which upheld an order requiring the company to remove negative reviews of a San Francisco law firm.

Dawn Hassell, the law firm’s managing attorney, hoped to remove a Yelp review by a former client that a judge determined was defamatory.

Aaron Schur, Yelp’s senior director of litigation, says the lower court’s decision is “ripe for abuse, contradicts long-standing legal principles and restricts the ability of websites to provide a balanced spectrum of views online.”

Monique Olivier, Hassell’s attorney, said in a statement that she was not surprised the Supreme Court has taken up the case, given the amount of attention it has received.

“This case is not one of a ‘bad review,’ ” she said. “It is a case where a court adjudicated statements to be defamatory after receiving and reviewing evidence about the falsity of those statements.”

Some internet companies say a ruling against Yelp could stifle free speech online and effectively gut other websites whose main function is offering consumers reviews of services and businesses.

In August, Facebook, Twitter and Microsoft said in a letter to the California Supreme Court that the ruling “radically departs from a large, unanimous and settled body of federal and state court precedent,” and could be used to “silence a vast quantity of protected and important speech.”

Hassell’s 2013 lawsuit accused a client, whom she briefly represented in a personal injury case, of defaming her on Yelp by falsely claiming that her firm failed to communicate with the client, among other things.

San Francisco Superior Court Judge Donald Sullivan found the statements defamatory and ordered the client and Yelp to remove them. Hassell said the client failed to answer her lawsuit or remove the posts. Hassell then sought out a court order demanding that Yelp do it.

A second judge and a state appeals court upheld Sullivan’s order.

Yelp says the judge’s order violates a 1996 federal law that courts have widely interpreted as protecting internet companies from liability for posts by third-party users and prohibiting the company from being treated as the speaker or publisher of users’ posts.

Internet law experts expect Yelp to prevail.