Marani Brands Inc. (MRIB)

[Matthew Berg]

Actually that is not necessarily true. Each new statement does not constitute a new clock. A pattern of behavior that makes up a claim of defamation is running from the moment of the first act and meeting the rules of discovery for the defamed. In California, if no action is taken on the first known act, the defamed has fallen into the category of in acceptance of "fair and honest criticism" for subsequent acts unless a different level of malice to the first act can be proven.

Furthermore, the defamed must prove malice. This is very plaintiff unfriendly in California as malice is defined as a knowing and reckless disregard for the truth. Unfortunately for MRIB I can think of few examples of criticism and supposed false claims that have not proven true which makes any case totally unwinable. It doesn't matter if MRIB was hurt by comment either. If they can't prove malice and even dissemination of information one believes to be true is a significant defense.

Bottom line is it's all moot. No one is taking any action because the first question Margrit will get in the interrogatories will be, "have you ever lied?" Well, she has and that will label her a liar in court. Too many example of her making false statements. First one I would ask is how she claimed increased demand. That's a biggie because it was patently false and she said it many times.