• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

Norsire Farm Lawsuit

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by aurum View Post
    Could someone please tell me who the Plaintiffs lawyer was? Thanks.
    Don't know his name, but he was from the firm of Dewy, Cheetham and Howe.
    www.OneJumpAhead.ca

    Comment


    • #22
      Regarding this case.

      Horse Breeder Sued for Defamatory Facebook Postings, Loses

      One of our attorney analysts looks at it. Hope it is helpful.
      Rate My Horse PRO®
      News | Equine Court | Background Checks | Ratings & Reviews

      Comment


      • #23
        Courts ruling on Ebersole Vs Mrs. Perry

        Facebook “likes” admissible but punitives cut in defamation case

        September 5th, 2012 · No Comments · Damages, Defamation, Evidence


        A dog trainer who claimed he was defamed by online accusations of animal abuse was entitled to tell a jury how many people “liked” the offending Facebook page, a federal judge has ruled.

        Nevertheless, U.S. District Judge James Cacheris said the jury’s “grossly excessive” $60,000 punitive damages verdict in favor of the dog trainer should be cut by three quarters. Cacheris says the defendant can either accept the reduction of punitives to $15,000 or take a new trial.

        Cacheris’ post-trial rulings come in a case with a long back story. Dog trainer Russell Ebersole served time in a federal prison for providing the government with bomb-detecting dogs that could not detect bombs. In 2011, local authorities in Frederick County began investigating claims of animal abuse at Ebersole’s facility.

        Believing she had witnessed such abuse herself, a Loudoun County horse breeder began posting graphic accusations of animal cruelty against Ebersole on her Facebook page. Bridget Kline-Perry claimed dogs were kicked, choked and shocked at Ebersole’s facility.

        Ebersole denied the claims and an Alexandria federal jury awarded Ebersole $15,000 in compensatory damages for defamation and business conspiracy and $60,000 in punitive damages.

        Kline-Perry asked for a new trial in part because Ebersole had put on evidence of 5,000 “likes” appearing on her Facebook page. She argued the “likes” evidence invited speculation about whether the people who “liked” her page had actually read the statements she posted about Ebersole.

        Denying the motion, Cacheris said the number of “likes” was a measure of the website’s popularity, helping to show how widely disseminated her accusations were and demonstrating her intent to reach a large audience.

        There are limits to the usefulness of the “likes” evidence, however, according to Cacheris. When Ebersole’s lawyer suggested the jury award him $20 for every Facebook “like,” the suggestion was “ungrounded and arbitrary,” Cacheris wrote.

        Cacheris found the $60,000 punitive damage award, eight times the amount of compensatory damages for libel, was “constitutionally suspect.” Kline-Perry’s conduct, the judge found, was not “extraordinarily reprehensible.”

        Among the factors the judge considered: the harm was economic not physical, the statements at issue were an isolated incident limited to a four-day period, and Kline-Perry was motivated to protect animals rather than to harm Ebersole.

        Comment


        • #24
          Wrong info

          Originally posted by JB View Post
          The story I read was that someone accused the kennel guy of illegally training dogs to sniff out bombs, but the dogs couldn't do it, so that case was dropped.
          Mr. Ebersole was convicted of having bomb dogs that could not find the bombs. He was convicted on 26 counts and spend 6 1/2 years in Federal Prison.

          Perhaps you need to type in Russell Lee Ebersole and DDADE and read what comes up.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by Ravencrest_Camp View Post
            Don't know his name, but he was from the firm of Dewy, Cheetham and Howe.
            Goodness, what a great laugh. I haven't heard anything about that practice in a long time.!!
            It's not true that I had nothing on. I had the radio on.”
            ? Marilyn Monroe

            Comment


            • #26
              Judges recent opinion on Ebersole vs Bridge Kline Perry

              http://valawyersweekly.com/vlwblog/


              Check out the judges recent opinion.

              You have to scroll down some.

              Comment


              • #27
                recent judges opinion

                Originally posted by Ravencrest_Camp View Post
                Don't know his name, but he was from the firm of Dewy, Cheetham and Howe.
                http://valawyersweekly.com/vlwblog/

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by Laurierace View Post
                  I read this as Norcrest farm and my first thought was "she should talk!"
                  Took the words right o/o my mouth...

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Perhaps all those who slammed Ms. Perry should now read this article.
                    Remember there are TWO SIDES to every story!!!!


                    http://www.nvdaily.com/news/2012/11/...uit-print.html

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Perhaps all those who slammed Ms. Perry should now read this article.
                      Remember there are TWO SIDES to every story!!!!


                      http://www.nvdaily.com/news/2012/11/...uit-print.html

                      Comment


                      • #31
                        I think the correct link is:
                        http://www.nvdaily.com/news/2012/11/...ng-lawsuit.php
                        Oh, well, clearly you're not thoroughly indoctrinated to COTH yet, because finger pointing and drawing conclusions are the cornerstones of this great online community. (Tidy Rabbit)

                        Comment


                        • #32
                          Kennel owner faces animal cruelty charges after winning lawsuit



















                          By Joe Beck

                          A Frederick County kennel owner, who won $30,000 in a defamation lawsuit against a Purcellville woman after she accused him of dog abuse, faces 13 counts of animal cruelty in indictments issued against him Thursday in circuit court.

                          The indictments against Russell Lee Ebersole form a grim litany of accusations, including hanging dogs from the neck, choking, beating and kicking, hitting with a PVC pipe and electric shocking.

                          The indictments identify a Doberman and several mixed breed dogs among the victims of the alleged abuse. Some of the indictments also contain the names of the dog owners.

                          The dates of the alleged offenses range from August 2009 to September 2011, according to the indictments.

                          Ebersole, 52, of 667 Walters Mill Lane is scheduled to appear in Frederick County Circuit Court on Nov. 28.

                          Earlier this year, a federal court awarded Ebersole $30,000 at the conclusion of a defamation lawsuit in which he accused Bridget Kline-Perry of Purcellville of spreading falsehoods about him online. The statements included abuse of dogs at his kennel.

                          Ebersole's lawsuit against Kline-Perry accused her of posting the allegedly false statements on Facebook and other social media outlets around the same time news organizations were reporting that Frederick County law enforcement officials were investigating him for animal abuse.

                          County animal control officers seized about 30 items from Ebersole's pet grooming, boarding and training facility at 667 Walters Mill Lane on Nov. 21, 2011. A deputy reported there were no "obvious signs of terrible injury" to pets remaining at the facility, but that 20 formal complaints against Ebersole had been filed in the two previous years.

                          Ebersole had previously spent 63 months in prison after federal officials accused him of providing law enforcement agents with bomb-sniffing dogs that failed to meet performance expectations.

                          Kline-Perry began posting Facebook messages about Ebersole and his kennel business in early December, according to his lawsuit.

                          Ebersole also filed a lawsuit in early October against Sharlin Oren, identified in court documents as an associate of Kline-Perry. The suit repeats many of the same allegations made against Kline-Perry and says the two women communicate extensively through Facebook and other social media.

                          Contact staff writer Joe Beck at 540-465-5137 ext. 142, or jbeck@nvdaily.com

                          Comment


                          • #33
                            Norsire Farm

                            Kennel owner faces animal cruelty charges after winning lawsuit



















                            By Joe Beck

                            A Frederick County kennel owner, who won $30,000 in a defamation lawsuit against a Purcellville woman after she accused him of dog abuse, faces 13 counts of animal cruelty in indictments issued against him Thursday in circuit court.

                            The indictments against Russell Lee Ebersole form a grim litany of accusations, including hanging dogs from the neck, choking, beating and kicking, hitting with a PVC pipe and electric shocking.

                            The indictments identify a Doberman and several mixed breed dogs among the victims of the alleged abuse. Some of the indictments also contain the names of the dog owners.

                            The dates of the alleged offenses range from August 2009 to September 2011, according to the indictments.

                            Ebersole, 52, of 667 Walters Mill Lane is scheduled to appear in Frederick County Circuit Court on Nov. 28.

                            Earlier this year, a federal court awarded Ebersole $30,000 at the conclusion of a defamation lawsuit in which he accused Bridget Kline-Perry of Purcellville of spreading falsehoods about him online. The statements included abuse of dogs at his kennel.

                            Ebersole's lawsuit against Kline-Perry accused her of posting the allegedly false statements on Facebook and other social media outlets around the same time news organizations were reporting that Frederick County law enforcement officials were investigating him for animal abuse.

                            County animal control officers seized about 30 items from Ebersole's pet grooming, boarding and training facility at 667 Walters Mill Lane on Nov. 21, 2011. A deputy reported there were no "obvious signs of terrible injury" to pets remaining at the facility, but that 20 formal complaints against Ebersole had been filed in the two previous years.

                            Ebersole had previously spent 63 months in prison after federal officials accused him of providing law enforcement agents with bomb-sniffing dogs that failed to meet performance expectations.

                            Kline-Perry began posting Facebook messages about Ebersole and his kennel business in early December, according to his lawsuit.

                            Ebersole also filed a lawsuit in early October against Sharlin Oren, identified in court documents as an associate of Kline-Perry. The suit repeats many of the same allegations made against Kline-Perry and says the two women communicate extensively through Facebook and other social media.

                            Contact staff writer Joe Beck at 540-465-5137 ext. 142, or jbeck@nvdaily.com

                            Comment


                            • #34
                              Not a lawyer here, but if he was found guilty...how is anything Norsire did/said/wrote, unlawful??? He was guilty of animal abuse. Can she appeal her verdict?? Just wondering.
                              www.crosscreeksporthorses.com
                              Breeders of Painted Thoroughbreds and Uniquely Painted Irish Sport Horses in Northeast Oklahoma

                              Comment


                              • #35
                                Originally posted by Ravencrest_Camp View Post
                                Don't know his name, but he was from the firm of Dewy, Cheetham and Howe.
                                Nyuk, Nyuk Nyuk!!!

                                "You are under arrest for operating your mouth under the influence of
                                ignorance!" Officer Beck

                                Comment

                                • Original Poster

                                  #36
                                  I would hope if convicted, she would have her judgement thrown out. That doesn't seem right if he is found guilty of animal abuse that she would still have to pay...but what do I know?

                                  This whole mess is a reminder to be very careful what is said about others.
                                  #JusticeForSunshine

                                  Comment


                                  • #37
                                    Originally posted by crosscreeksh View Post
                                    Not a lawyer here, but if he was found guilty...how is anything Norsire did/said/wrote, unlawful??? He was guilty of animal abuse. Can she appeal her verdict?? Just wondering.
                                    I think Ebersole was found guilty of cheating the government by not supplying properly-trained bomb-sniffing dogs. He is now being charged with animal abuse, but has not been convicted. So the question is, what will happen to the judgement he won against Kline-Perry if the animal abuse charges are upheld? Will she be vindicated and be able to overturn that verdict?
                                    Last edited by PeteyPie; Dec. 6, 2012, 04:41 AM. Reason: left out a word
                                    "Random capitAlization really Makes my day." -- AndNirina

                                    Comment


                                    • #38
                                      Here is info on Ebersole's appeal in 2004 of his conviction for wire fraud relating to the bomb-sniffing dogs:
                                      http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1489071.html

                                      An excerpt which shows what a scumbag he is:
                                      For example, a former Detector Dogs employee testified that, in March 2002, she had assisted Ebersole in creating test results and certifications (dated as far back as 1997) for dogs designated for the IRS assignment, and that Ebersole had embellished the resumes of their handlers, adding false information such as that one handler had “[a]ssisted the Secret Service on security missions for the [P]resident of the United States and foreign dignitaries.”   Another former Detector Dogs employee testified that she was a 19-year-old kennel hand when Ebersole directed her to serve as a handler at the BOG-FED facilities;  she stated that, “if a dog would have hit on something, I never knew who to call, what to do, what I was supposed to do exactly.”   The trial evidence also showed that Ebersole utilized forged certificates proclaiming him to be a certified instructor of handlers of bomb-sniffing dogs, and a document purporting to set forth Detector Dogs's training curriculum (a program running 303.5 hours in length).   However, handlers testified that they trained for no more than a fraction of that time before being posted with the federal agencies, which had been told by Ebersole in written proposals that the handlers were seasoned canine team veterans with more than twenty years of experience.   Witnesses also contradicted other claims made in the written proposals, including that several Detector Dogs's employees were nationally certified trainers and judges with the United States Police Canine Association and the North American Police Work Dog Association, and that Virginia's Department of Criminal Justice Services had approved Detector Dogs's training procedures and certified its handlers.
                                      "Random capitAlization really Makes my day." -- AndNirina

                                      Comment


                                      • #39
                                        This is interesting. According to a January 26, 2012 article in the NVDaily.com
                                        Ebersole's complaint states:

                                        The statements alleged above, taken as a whole, [are] libelous per se, because they imply that the Plaintiff is abusive to animals in his care, incompetent as a trainer, a scam artist and not fit to serve as a pet escort operator, dog trainer, or suppler of manufactured products to assist service dogs in performing their function for the disabled, and as such are capable of defamatory meaning and construction.

                                        So Ebersole's complaint is that Kline-Smith's statments "imply" that he
                                        1. is abusive to animals
                                        2. is incompetent as a trainer
                                        3. a scam artist
                                        4. not fit to serve as a pet escort operator
                                        5. not fit to serve as a dog trainer
                                        6. not fit to server as a suppler (sic) of manufactured products to assist service dogs in performing their function for the disabled.

                                        At the time of this complaint in 2012, he had not been charged with animal abuse, but he HAD been CONVICTED of wire fraud in 2003 in connection with his bomb-sniffing dogs. Details of that conviction showed that the dogs weren't properly trained because they could not identify bombs. Wouldn't that make him incompetent as a trainer? It also showed that he willfully scammed the government by committing wire fraud. Isn't that a scam artist? Testimony by Navy personnel that the animals were starving and two of them later died seem like evidence that would substantiate Kline-Perry's allegations of animal abuse, so either the facts were not strong enough or Kline-Perry's attorney was really bad.

                                        The article does identify her attorney:

                                        Kline-Perry, represented by Fairfax attorney Steven W. Bancroft, admitted in her answer to the complaint to publishing emails and posts on Facebook and comments in local media. The defendant denied any of the plaintiff's allegations and asked the court to dismiss Ebersole's lawsuit.

                                        The plaintiff seeks $1 million in compensatory damages and $350,000 in punitive damages.
                                        "Random capitAlization really Makes my day." -- AndNirina

                                        Comment


                                        • #40
                                          Haven’t studied media law since 1998, but at that point the general consensus was that libel and slander suits were difficult to win. Many attorneys (even experienced well-regarded trial attorneys) have no experience with these types of lawsuits. Their knowledge barely extends past New York Times v Sullivan.

                                          To be clear here, I have absolutely no knowledge of the Norsire litigation, and am not making any comment of any kind about it, but in general, I can see a scenario where a defendant is served, takes the complaint to an attorney they have used for years and feel comfortable with, and are advised not to worry because the plaintiff will not win (which might have been a reasonable assessment to have made of this litigation at one point. We are looking at this all with the benefit of hindsight.) And as a result, the defendant might have been a bit over confident and a bit under-prepared. This may not be a case of having bad legal counsel. Rather, there may have been factors that came out at trial that had an impact, and this is an area of the law that is evolving quickly. It is very possible to be caught off guard at trial.

                                          About an appeal, I believe a party in a civil action can appeal matters of law, but not findings of fact, and I think (not sure) that the judgment is based upon findings of fact the trial court made.

                                          There are all sorts of anomalies in the law, it is not perfect and never has been. There is actually a Supreme Court precedent that holds that evidence of innocence is not sufficient reason to overturn the verdict in a death penalty case.
                                          Logres Farm on Facebook
                                          http://logresfarmpintowarmbloods.com/
                                          http://logresdobermans.com/

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X