No Exit for Trump Campaign, Powell From Dominion Worker’s Suit

Former President Donald Trump’s campaign and its former lawyer Sidney Powell failed to shed claims of defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress by a Dominion Voting Systems Inc. employee, who Powell and others alleged interfered in the 2020 presidential election.

Eric Coomer was then a director of product strategy and security at Dominion, a company that provided election technology and support services across the country.

Coomer alleges the Trump campaign, Powell, and others, recklessly spread dubious and unverifiable claims that he conspired with Antifa activists to switch votes to President-elect Joe Biden, asserting claims of defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and civil conspiracy.

The defendants sought dismissal of the claims under Colorado’s anti-SLAPP statute. SLAPP stands for “strategic lawsuit against public participation.” Anti-SLAPP laws allow defendants to seek dismissal of claims if they can show they are meritless and designed to punish parties for constitutionally protected activities, such as free speech or the right to petition.

The defendants argued Coomer couldn’t show actual malice because they didn’t know their statements were false, dooming the defamation and emotional distress claims. The Colorado Court of Appeals rejected this argument in a ruling issued Thursday.

The defendants also include Joseph Oltmann, the co-host of the Conservative Daily podcast; Newsmax host Michelle Malkin; James Hoft, the founder, editor-in-chief, and contributing author of The Gateway Pundit website; and Eric Metaxas, the host of The Eric Metaxas Radio Show.
Trump’s then-attorney Rudolph Giuliani was also named in the suit, but the action against him has been stayed because he filed for bankruptcy while the appeal was pending.

The underlying suit alleges Oltmann originated the false claims that put Coomer at the center of the unfounded conspiracy. Oltmann publicly claimed to have “infiltrated a conference call” with Antifa activists in which someone identified as “Eric from Dominion” told participants he would ensure Biden won, according to the complaint.

“Given the gravity of the allegations and the size of the inferential leap they required,"—that a speaker on a conference call was Coomer—"there is a reasonable likelihood that a jury could find that Oltmann acted with reckless disregard for the truth in making those accusations,” the court said.

As to the other defendants, the court said, “There is a reasonable likelihood that a jury could find” that they “recklessly disregarded the truth by asserting such an explosive and improbable claim without any evidence to support it.”

The court, however, found Coomer hasn’t shown “a reasonable likelihood of success on his conspiracy claim” because he “presented no evidence of an agreement to defame him.”

Oltmann never explained how he gained access to the purported phone call or how he knew who was on it.

The court affirmed the denial of special motions to dismiss Coomer’s defamation claim, with the exception of two tweets that it said are protected under the Communications Decency Act. It also affirmed the denial of motions to dismiss the claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress and the request for injunction relief.

It remanded to the district court to consider some defendants’ requests for attorneys’ fees and costs.

Cain & Skarnulis PLLC and Recht Kornfeld PC represent Coomer. Campbell Killin Brittan & Ray LLC represents Donald J. Trump for President Inc. Arrington Law Firm and Kennedys CMK LLP represent Powell. Harris, Karstaedt, Jamison & Powers PC represents Oltmann. Randy B. Corporon of Aurora, Colo., and Jonathon Burns of St. Louis, Mo. represent Hoft. Patterson Ripplinger PC represents Malkin. Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP represents Metaxas.

The case is Coomer v. Donald J. Trump for President Inc., 2024 BL 123824, Colo. Ct. App., No. 22CA0843, 4/11/24.