You Can Sue Those For Fake, Negative Reviews

Online reviews can be critical to a company’s success. If these reviews are opinions, they’re protected from libel law. However, false statements of alleged facts can be the basis of legal actions when they cause harm to your business as a business litigation lawyer can attest. An Ohio case involves fake reviews of a personal injury law firm that an appeals court decided.

Law Firm Entangled In Fake, Negative Google Reviews

The Amaro Law Firm in Houston, Texas, had more than a hundred fictional, negative reviews posted on its Google business page in 2022, according to Court News Ohio. None of the reviews came from individuals who had contacted or were represented by the law firm. The IP address used to post them belonged to Patrick and Ronald DeMichael of Licking County, Ohio.

The law firm claims it had more than 1,500 reviews, many of them with the top ratings before the fake ones started appearing. Many positive reviews helped the firm attract people searching Google for a personal injury claim. They claim these negative reviews were intended to hurt them, and their ability to attract clients suffered because of the poor ratings invented by the DeMichaels.

Court proceedings found the reviews were fake and didn’t dismiss the DeMichaels from the case, so there must be evidence that they’re responsible. The appellate decision doesn’t state why two Ohio men attacked the reputation of a Texas law firm.

Lower Court Dismisses Case, Claims Average Reader Would Believe Opinions, Not Facts, Stated

The trial court dismissed the law firm’s lawsuit in December 2023. The court ruled that all reviews, despite being fake, were opinions protected by the First Amendment, and the average reader wouldn’t think they contained facts. The law firm sued the DeMichaels for libel, defamation, invasion of privacy/false light, tortious interference with contracts, and prospective economic advantage.

The appeals court for Ohio’s Fifth Appellate Division disagreed in September 2024, reversed the decision, and sent the case back for a trial. They stated the reviews contained allegations of facts, which, if disproven, can be the basis of a libel action as our friends at Focus Law LA can share.

Online Reviews Invented Up “Facts” Which You Can Base A Libel Case On

The appellate court found that 62 Google reviews for the Amaro Law Firm described fictitious client relationships in which invented clients criticized the firm for its alleged failure to communicate or follow up. Since these statements may be checked, the court stated that the law firm can pursue legal action against the defendants. The court also ruled that another 57 fake reviews had one-star rankings, so they were considered opinions and couldn’t be defamatory.

The court grouped 99 reviews into categories. To determine if language was a defamatory statement of alleged fact or protected opinion, the court reviews the following four factors:

  • The language used
  • Whether the statement’s verifiable
  • The statement’s general context
  • The overall context where the statement appeared

Of 99 reviews, 57 used these statements: “no follow-up,” “never called me back,” and “no communication.” Some also contained: “case,” “experience,” and “outcome” to refer to the reviewer’s case. Five other reviews had subjective language, such as “poor communication,” indicating they were an Amaro or potential client. They had language like “dealing with personal injury case,” “called about an accident,” and “no idea what is going on with case.”

The court found 62 reviews in which the writer communicated that they were a client and the firm was unresponsive. The names attached to the reviews can be used to verify whether the person was a client and, if so, what happened with the case.

The court stated that the general context was 99 reviews posted online, submitted in a short time, and presented as being from individuals, which led to credibility. Google’s terms of service require reviewers to state truthfully what happened, and fake content is explicitly banned from Google, which made the DeMichaels’ reviews more credible.

“When a review contains specific statements capable of being proved true or false in explanation for a negative online review or rating, these statements can be grounds for a defamation claim,” the appellate opinion states.

If your business has fake reviews, discuss with your attorney whether they are protected statements or can be the basis of legal action if they are not removed.

Scroll to Top