Facts

In May 2011, defendant Jack Sissoyev booked a stone sheep hunt with a man named Jerry Geraci of Upper Stikine River Adventures. Sissoyev wired a deposit of $13,000 from Royal Custom Designs' bank account, the company for whom he is president and CEO, directly to Geraci's business account. The total price of the hunt, according to Geraci, was $20,000 all-in, plus a trophy fee of $7,000 should Sissoyev harvest an animal. According to Sissoyev, the price was only $20,000 all-in.

Around the same time, Ron Nemetchek and Maria Origoni were negotiating with Geraci to buy his territory where he conducted hunts, not his business. In doing so, Geraci did not initially tell plaintiffs that he had booked a hunt with Sissoyev or that he had taken a deposit from Sissoyev. When the territory sale papers were finalized, the government stopped the sale and notified the parties that the sale would not be completed until the government finished investigating Geraci for some wildlife violations.

Maria contacted Sissoyev and told him the situation. Maria told Sissoyev that if he wanted to continue on the hunt, he would have to pay additional amounts including the required government fees (license, tag, taxes) prior to going on the hunt. If he did not want to continue on the hunt, he could ask for his money back from Geraci. Eventually, Sissoyev did not agree to pay any more money and requested a refund of the deposit.

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
While the government conducted its investigation, plaintiffs contended, the government would allow Geraci to finish off his hunts, including Sissoyev, if Maria would be the interim outfitter but the hunters would be Geraci's responsibility. Maria accepted. Maria contacted Sissoyev and told him the situation. Geraci had not given any money to Maria and the sale of the territory had not been completed. Sissoyev refused to pay the required government fees and canceled the hunt, requesting a refund of the deposit.

Instead of going after Geraci for the deposit, Sissoyev focused on Maria insisting that she pay him the deposit back. Maria kept telling Sissoyev that he paid Geraci, Geraci has his money and if he wants a refund that he'll have to contact Geraci. In July 2011, Sissoyev registered five different websites to his company's, Royal Custom Designs, name and listed himself as the administrative contact, and another website that he registered in his company's name in November 2010. On all six of these websites, he posted the same defamatory comments. The effect of posting the same statements on numerous websites was to make the websites appear high in Google search results (i.e. in the first four search results on the first Google search result page) so that a person doing a web search on plaintiffs would see one of the websites in the top five search results.

Sissoyev also went to Scott Ellis, the director of the Guide Outfitters Association of British Columbia, to complain about Maria taking his money, and Ellis told him that his contract was with Geraci, and Geraci had informed Ellis that he would pay the money back to Sissoyev. Sissoyev's own lawyer(s) told him the same thing, but he would not heed their advice. He continued to tell people by word of mouth that Maria cancelled his hunt and took his deposit money, although that was not true. His lawyers asked him to take the websites down in January 2012, but he kept the websites up until March 2013.

Prior to the defamatory postings in the fall of 2011, plaintiffs had no problems booking clients. Afterwards, in 2012 through 2016, their bookings drastically declined year after year. To make ends meet, they began to sell off business equipment. At a trade show in 2014 where plaintiffs market their services, Sissoyev went around to others at the show showing them plaintiffs' confidential business records and talking about the lawsuit.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants claimed that all three of plaintiffs' causes of action arose out of the allegedly inaccurate statements made by Sissoyev only via a webpage, concerning the entity known as Upper Stikine River Outfitters. Upper Stikine River Outfitters is not a plaintiff in this case. Defendant argued that none of the four named plaintiffs has any interest, ownership or otherwise, in the entity known as Upper Stikine River Outfitters and there was no slanderous or libelous conduct directed to any of the four named plaintiffs.

In addition, defendant argued that none of the four plaintiffs suffered actual damage as a result of any action or inaction by Sissoyev. Indeed, as confirmed by plaintiffs own financial statements for the period Aug. 31, 2010 through Aug. 31, 2013, plaintiffs' revenues from hunt bookings actually increased every year between 2010 and 2013. Assuming arguendo there was a decrease in the number of bookings, it was due to causes other than the posting of one website, seen only by a handful of internet users, at most, for a finite period of time. Defendants argued that other causes could have been the recession, which caused a drastic cut back on "luxury items" such as big game hunting, a significant decrease in the percentage of "kills" on hunts guided by plaintiffs, and a severe winter in 2010-2011, which led to a significant die off in the number of white tail deer starting in 2012-2013. Defendants also included an increase in white tail deer hunting in the United States, plaintiffs' admitted lack of experience in stone sheep hunting in British Columbia, and negative press reports concerning the criminal activities of the individual from whom plaintiffs allegedly purchased the Upper Stikine River territory, as factors.

Further, the statements made by Sissoyev in the subject website were, at best, his opinion of his own personal dealings with Origoni and a reiteration of his conversation with Nemetchek and therefore not actionable. Finally, defendant contended that, the gist of the statements made on the webpage were true. Specifically, at the time the webpage was created in or about late 2011. These statements included that the ownership of Upper Stikine was embroiled in a legal dispute with Sissoyev, claiming he was a hunter whose deposits were taken and was seeking redress in both U.S. and Canadian Courts, and other statements, including that his deposit was not returned, and that Sissoyev's claims and an alleged investigation by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were pending. Sissoyev claimed that Nemetchek admitted to him during a phone call that he was 0 for 4 on stone sheep hunts in 2011, and complaints were made and pending with The Guide and Outfitters Association of British Columbia and the Alberta Professional Outfitters Society.

Defendants also claimed that Sissoyev did not make the alleged slanderous statements within the scope of his alleged employment with Royal Custom Designs or in the actual performance of any duties to Royal Custom Designs. Royal Custom Designs is in the business of custom furniture design and manufacturing. The instant case has absolutely nothing to do with the design or manufacture of custom furniture. Therefore, Royal Custom Designs cannot be liable for any actions by Sissoyev.

Settlement Discussions

According to plaintiffs, they initially demanded $1.8 million in lost profits and emotional harm. Defendants countered with an offer of $70,000. On Sept. 14, 2015, plaintiffs issued CCP 998s to both defendants totaling $1.6 million. Defendants rejected the CCP 998 demands. According to defense, the parties participated in formal and informal settlement discussions, but were unable to reach an agreement.

Damages

Since 2011, plaintiffs claimed, they have suffered lost profits due to a steady decline in bookings as a result of the defamatory statements posted and verbally spread about them by Sissoyev. In addition, plaintiffs' personal reputation, family and financial stability have suffered greatly. Plaintiffs' claimed their businesses may never recover as a result of the damage because they had to sell off equipment, which will make it more difficult to run their operations.

Result

The jury found in favor of plaintiffs, Ron Nemetchek, Maria Origoni, North River Outfitters, Ltd. and North River Stone Outfitters, Ltd. against defendants, Jack Sissoyev and Royal Custom Designs Inc. Plaintiffs were awarded $17,657,420.

Other Information

According to plaintiff, the jury found that Sissoyev published the defamatory internet postings and verbal statements to people other than plaintiffs, that the statements were false, that the statements were the kind that would tend to injure plaintiffs in their occupation, and that plaintiffs suffered harm to their business. The jury also found that Sissoyev was acting in the course and scope of his duties as president and CEO of Royal Custom Designs when he made the statements about plaintiffs, and that Sissoyev acted with malice. Prior to trial, there was only one mediation that did not resolve in a settlement. According to defense, objections to the proposed judgment have been filed. Judgment has not yet been entered. Post-trial motions and appellate matters are anticipated. EXPERT TESTIMONY: Plaintiffs' economist, James Christopoulos, opined that there would theoretically be a two-year, five-year or 10-year recovery period. Because the trial was had in the fifth-year since the initial defamatory posting/statements, the only recovery left was the 10-year period, in which he opined that plaintiffs will continue to lose profits theoretically to 10 years as they had not recovered at trial. In fact, plaintiffs were in worse shape at trial due to the defendants' defamatory campaign, than they ever were. Defendants' hunt booking expert, Edward "Butch" Manasse, opined that the hunting industry as a whole, as opposed to just plaintiffs' business, suffered due to various circumstances, including the recession, winter kill (a phrase that reefers to bad winter weather causing animals to prematurely die off), Canadian laws, and more favorable hunting in the United States. Defendants' IT expert, Jessie Stricchiola, opined that defendant had only one website with the defamatory postings, and that six or seven other website links all directed internet searches to that website. Stricchiola also opined that there was no evidence of any search optimization relating to this one website. FILING DATE: June 15, 2012.

Deliberation

eight hours

Length

seven days