Judge Dismisses Class Action Lawsuit Accusing Lance Armstrong of Lying in Memoirs

Judge Dismisses Class Action Accusing Lance Armstrong of Lying in Memoirs

By Anne Bucher

A federal judge last week dismissed the majority of a class action lawsuit accusing famed bicyclist Lance Armstrong and his publishers of fraud in light of Armstrong’s doping confession, finding that memoirs and their marketing are protected by the First Amendment.

The class action lawsuit accused Armstrong, Penguin Group USA Inc. and Random House Inc. of falsely advertising two of Armstrong’s memoir books as works of nonfiction in violation of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law. The plaintiffs claim they were misled about Armstrong’s actions and that they would not have purchased the books if they had known that Armstrong was guilty of doping.

In his 2000 book “It’s Not about the Bike: My Journey Back to Life” and the 2003 follow-up “Every Second Counts,” Armstrong lamented the use of performance-enhancing drugs in cycling. He attributed his success to “superior physical training, proper diet and an extraordinary drive to succeed,” the class action lawsuit said. In January, he admitted to using performance-enhancing drugs.

The plaintiffs alleged in the class action lawsuit that Armstrong and the publishing company intended to defraud consumers by perpetuating the Lance Armstrong “brand” in order to bring in millions of dollars. 

The plaintiffs say Armstrong’s brand was created in 1998 by Armstrong, his financier and his agent-manager. In their class action lawsuit, they claim that the success of Armstrong’s brand was dependent on his image as a clean, hard-working athlete. According to their lawsuit, the defendants knew they would be unable to sell his books and other merchandise if the public believed Armstrong used performance-enhancing drugs. Therefore, part of maintaining the brand involved vociferous denial that Armstrong used performance-enhancing drugs. From July 1999 through August 2012, Armstrong continued to deny that he used the drugs during television interviews, print media and sworn testimony.

On September 10, U.S. District Judge Morrison England granted the publishers’ anti-SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) motions to dismiss the claims against them. He also granted Armstrong’s anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss most of the claims that had been asserted against him. The anti-SLAPP law allows for the “early dismissal of meritless First Amendment cases aimed at chilling expression through costly, time-consuming litigation,” Judge England said in his decision to dismiss the class action lawsuit.

In their class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs argued that “California’s anti-SLAPP statute does not provide a shield for speech made in furtherance of Armstrong’s illegal activity.” Judge England acknowledged that Armstrong’s cycling career and the books that he wrote about it are “something of concern to a substantial number of people.”  However, he found that lying about the use of drugs is not criminal conduct and does not preclude Armstrong from being protected by the anti-SLAPP statute.

“Here, each defendant contends that the activity alleged by the plaintiffs was ‘conduct in furtherance of the exercise of … the constitutional right of free speech in connection with a public issue or an issue of public interest,” Judge England said. “It is without question that statements concerning Lance Armstrong ‘concern a person or entity in the public eye’ and/or are ‘a topic of widespread, public interest.”

The plaintiffs are represented by Kevin P. Roddy of Wilentz Goldman & Spitzer PA, Tracey Buck-Walsh of the Law Office of Tracey Buck-Walsh, Tab Turner of Turner & Associates PA and Henry Rossbacher of The Rossbacher Firm.

The Lance Armstrong Class Action Lawsuit is Rob Stutzman, et al. v. Lance Armstrong, et al., Case No. 2:13-cv-0016, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.

All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions