SJR January 2009:z-Issue Template
1/26/09
5:07 PM
Page 4
off the record Biondi Vs. Meyer, still in court Despite a judge's ruling last month throwing out most of a lawsuit by St. Louis University against Prof. Avis Meyer, SLU lawyers are still trying to get Meyer to pay tens of thousands of dollars for their legal fees and alleged damages. The suit, say Meyer's supporters, is being pushed by Rev. Lawrence Biondi, the university president. The two men have had an ongoing feud for years, and last summer Meyer was barred from the newsroom of the University News, where he had been a popular faculty adviser for 34 years. Meyer has said Biondi blames him for anything Biondi perceives as negative in the paper. Student journalists still come to see Meyer about editing matters, and some 300 former students and supporters have backed Meyer on a website, many of them refusing to make donations to the university until the suit, which they call “vindictive,” is dropped. In early 2007, university officials indicated to the student editors that the newspaper might have to become independent. The students explored the possibility of going off campus, but never did. To preserve the paper's name for the students, Meyer incorporated it with the Missouri Secretary of State. He disincorporated the name several months later, after being contacted by university lawyers from the downtown firm of Lewis, Rice & Fingersh. Even so, several weeks later the SLU lawyers filed suit against Meyer, alleging federal trademark violations. Biondi's lawyers have tried to prove that Meyer used the newspaper's name, or was planning to, for an independent newspaper. They have pursued many motions of discovery, depositions, and even alleged that Meyer deleted his emails, which they said would be adverse to him. Meyer has denied doing anything with the name. U.S. District Judge Carol Jackson, known for taking a long time to throw out weak cases, finally did so when she ruled for Meyer in dismissing six of seven claims, just before Christmas. But SLU lawyers still are pushing for a bench trial on the last claim, which has similar arguments as the others had. The remaining claim is that Meyer is in violation of an old Missouri Statute (not invoked since the 1930s) in that he misused the name of a benevo-
lent organization, namely the university, and it wants an injunction against him. Meyer's supporters say it's an attempt by Biondi to get a ruling against Meyer so his tenure can be revoked and the university can fire him. Frank Janoski, one of SLU's lawyers, filed a summary of some of his fees last summer showing he was charging SLU $357 an hour for filing various motions and court responses. SLU's suit seeks damages for donations withheld by alumni, saying Meyer is the cause of it. Meyer has had to hire his own lawyer and has told associates he is broke. The fees for SLU's lawyers may top $100,000, say court observers. SLU seeks treble damages that could reach $1 million, the suit says, if Meyer is found to have willfully misused the newspaper's name. Biondi has not been involved in the suit—on the record. When the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported on six of the charges being dismissed, the story never mentioned Biondi either. Roy Malone
Microfilming of newspapers depends on Missouri budget Microfilming of Missouri's newspapers is on hold while the State Historical Society awaits the next state budget. The Columbia-based State Historical Society of Missouri (not to be confused with the St. Louis-based Missouri Historical Society) depends on the state for about 80 percent of its budget, at a time when the state is running short of funds. “We are waiting to see whether or not the governor will withhold part of our appropriation for this fiscal year, as well as whether or not there will be budget cuts for next fiscal year,’’ said Gary Kremer, executive director of the Historical Society. In the meantime, the Historical Society will continue to store periodicals as they come in, but will not microfilm any until it knows what its funding will be. “It would be unwise not to be prepared,” Kremer said. “We are normally six months to a year behind in microfilming, so we're probably going to be even further behind.” The Historical Society maintains the most extensive collection of microfilm copies of Missouri newspapers. It currently microfilms copies of more than 300 Missouri
newspapers, Kremer, said. Many are not available online or anywhere else. It microfilms every newspaper it receives except for a handful of the larger newspapers that microfilm their own copies. In those cases, the Historical Society buys copies of the microfilm. Benjamin Israel
Guide on taping phone calls In Missouri, an individual who is a part, to a wire communication, or who has the consent of one of the parties to the communication, can lawfully record it or disclose its contents, unless the person is intercepting the communication for the purpose of committing a criminal or tortuous act. Recording or disclosing the contents of a wire communication by all other persons is a felony. Anyone whose communications have been recorded or disclosed in violation of the law can bring a civil suit to recover the greater of actual damages, $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, and can recover punitive damages, attorney fees and litigation costs as well. A Missouri court has held that radio broadcasts from cordless telephones are not wire communications, and thus, recording such radio broadcasts is not illegal under the eavesdropping statute. It is also a felony to view or photograph a person in “a state of full or partial nudity” if the person “is in a place where he would have a reasonable expectation of privacy.” In Illinois, an eavesdropping device cannot be used to record or overhear a conversation without the consent of all parties to the conversation. It is illegal to disclose information one knows or should have known was obtained with an eavesdropping device. Violations of the eavesdropping law are punishable as felonies. Civil liability for actual and punitive damages is authorized as well. Standard radio scanners are not eavesdropping devices. It is illegal in Illinois to videotape, photograph or film another person without that person’s consent in a restroom, tanning bed or salon, locker room, changing room, hotel bedroom or in their residence without their consent. From The News Media, And The Law (Fall 2008) published by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.
DECEMBER 2008/JANUARY 2009 ST LOUIS JOURNALISM REVIEW | 4