Chess.com has formally requested the Eastern Missouri District Court to dismiss GM Hans Niemann‘s defamation lawsuit. The movement to dismiss, filed on December 2, 2022, asserts that the lawsuit “may have been introduced solely as a public relations stunt.” 

Chess.com’s reply to Niemann’s complaints comes 43 days after the lawsuit was dropped at courtroom by Niemann’s attorneys on October 20. In a 27-page doc, the Chess.com attorneys current a set of arguments as to why the courtroom shouldn’t enable the swimsuit to maneuver ahead. 

In addition to Chess.com, Niemann’s lawsuit names GM Magnus Carlsen, GM Hikaru Nakamura, the Play Magnus Group, and IM Danny Rensch as defendants and seeks not less than $100 million in damages. Against all 5 entities, Niemann is claiming slander, libel, illegal group boycott below the Sherman Act, tortious interference with contract and enterprise expectations, and civil conspiracy. 

Chess.com’s attorneys declare that every one 5 components of Niemann’s grievance are “plainly with out benefit.” They reference 71 earlier instances in a movement to dismiss that spans 27 pages. By default, a movement can not exceed 15 pages, however a joint request by Chess.com and Carlsen to exceed this restrict was granted by the courtroom.

Chess.com first addresses Niemann’s try to claim a federal antitrust declare below the Sherman Act. Niemann’s swimsuit means that he was unreasonably restricted in his methods to make a dwelling by way of chess tournaments, endorsements, and different enterprise alternatives as a result of Chess.com, PlayMagnus, Carlsen, Nakamura, and Rensch had “concerted actions to ban and blacklist Niemann” from the “international aggressive chess business.”

In the movement, Chess.com’s attorneys assert that Niemann fails to adequately show the existence of a conspiracy or group boycott, that there was an precise antitrust damage, and in addition that there was any alleged settlement that unreasonably restrained commerce.

Niemann’s asserted claims for libel, slander, tortious interference, and civil conspiracy are “meritless on their face,” based on Chess.com attorneys, and “have to be dismissed on the threshold as a result of they’re barred by Connecticut’s anti-SLAPP statute.” This statute permits defendants to file a particular movement to dismiss when a grievance is “primarily based on the opposing occasion’s train of its proper of free speech, proper to petition the federal government, or proper of affiliation” below the U.S. or Connecticut constitutions.

Chess.com’s movement notes {that a} related protection has been introduced up by Carlsen’s attorneys, who’ve claimed that Connecticut’s anti-SLAPP statute precludes all of Niemann’s state legislation claims. Even although Niemann’s lawsuit was filed within the state of Missouri, his claims could be ruled by Connecticut legislation as a result of it’s Niemann’s place of residence. Citing the swimsuit Fuqua Homes, Inc. v. Beattie (2004), Connecticut, due to this fact, has the “most vital relationship to the problems introduced within the case.”

Should the courtroom disagree with Chess.com and Carlsen right here and deem Connecticut’s anti-SLAPP statute irrelevant, the Chess.com attorneys argue that Niemann’s defamation claims additionally fail below the legislation of Missouri. In their opinion, the allegations require that the defendant will need to have revealed a defamatory assertion that’s “actionable,” which means, “objectively false.” Additionally, when a defamatory assertion is allegedly made a few public determine, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires the plaintiff to additionally show that the assertion was revealed with precise malice. According to Chess.com, none of their statements had been objectively false. They are opinions and don’t show precise malice.

Niemann’s tortious interference declare fails as effectively, based on Chess.com. He had argued that, due to actions by Chess.com, PlayMagnus, Carlsen, Nakamura, and Rensch, his scheduled match with the younger German grandmaster Vincent Keymer was canceled and that negotiations with the Tata Steel Chess Tournament had been abruptly ended. Chess.com states that Niemann “fails to allege any details relating to Chess.com’s precise information of his negotiations with the Tata Steel Chess Tournament or a deliberate match with Keymer.”

Finally, Niemann’s standalone declare for civil conspiracy fails, based on Chess.com, as a result of “it’s spinoff of his different claims” and this conspiracy declare “fails for the impartial cause that Niemann doesn’t allege any settlement among the many Defendants.”

What will occur subsequent shouldn’t be clear but. Niemann’s attorneys have an opportunity to reply to this movement, but when they do, Chess.com has a chance to submit a reply temporary. The courtroom will then probably take the matter up at a listening to earlier than issuing a call. At the time of writing, it’s unclear if different defendants have additionally issued a movement to dismiss.

Previous protection: