Review Site Can't Be Ordered to Remove Posts, California Justices Rule

Review Site Can't Be Ordered to Remove Posts, California Justices Rule

SAN FRANCISCO — The California Supreme Court yesterday reversed an appellate court ruling that upheld an order that required Yelp to remove a negative review of a business.

State justices held in their decision that federal immunity under Section 230 applies to a website that is a repository of views posted by third parties.

The case has been closely watched because removal orders such as the one obtained against Yelp could be used to silence online speech and undermine the viability of a platform.

Industry attorney Corey D. Silverstein told XBIZ that the decision is a “much needed win for Section 230, which has been under a tremendous amount of attack as of late.”

“Good for Yelp for having the guts to make its own decision when it ignored a judgment from the trial court that was riddled with irregularities,” Silverstein said. “Yelp took a chance in ignoring the trial court and ultimately won. Unfortunately, most ISPs would have probably gone along with the trial court’s original judgment.”

The ruling comes in a case where a woman, Ava Bird, posted a one-star review of the Hassell Law Group on Yelp, expressing her displeasure with its representation in her personal injury action, advising, “[T]o save your case, steer clear of this law firm!”

The San Francisco law firm and its owner, attorney Dawn Hassell, sued Bird, claiming the review was libelous. That lawsuit resulted in a default judgment.

A San Francisco Superior Court judge awarded Hassell and her firm damages and ordered Bird to remove the “steer clear” review, which she has not done.

The judgment also required Yelp to remove the offending review.

Yelp, which was not a party to the lawsuit, was served with the judgment. It moved to set aside the default, claiming in part that it violated both due process and Section 230.

The San Francisco judge denied Yelp’s motion, and a state court of appeal affirmed on several bases.

California justices granted review solely on the due process and Section 230 issues.

By requiring Yelp to delete the offending review, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye explained in the ruling, Yelp was being treated as the publisher of the content in violation of the statute.

“The question here is whether a different result should obtain because plaintiffs made the tactical decision not to name Yelp as a defendant,” Cantil-Sakauye wrote. “Put another way, we must decide whether plaintiffs’ litigation strategy allows them to accomplish indirectly what Congress has clearly forbidden them to achieve directly. We believe the answer is no.”

Silverstein noted that the California Supreme Court got this decision "100 percent correct" and that the ruling showed why Section 230 is important for free-speech liberties.

“In this case had the plaintiff named Yelp as a defendant from the beginning of the lawsuit, Yelp would have surely sought dismissal on Section 230 grounds and would most likely have prevailed,” Silverstein said. “I suspect that plaintiff/their counsel recognized that they had little to no chance in prevailing against Yelp and so they strategically proceeded against the named defendant, who incidentally put up no fight and lost by default.

“Could you imagine an internet where review sites, blogs, and web hosts could be held liable for content posted by third parties?” Silverstein asked.

“This case should be viewed as a reminder to everyone about the importance of Section 230 and why government at all levels must be challenged when it attempts to shrink the breadth of Section 230 protection.”

Related:  

Copyright © 2025 Adnet Media. All Rights Reserved. XBIZ is a trademark of Adnet Media.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.

More News

Octavia Red Stars in Latest From Deeper

Octavia Red stars with Manuel Ferrera in the latest release from Vixen Media Group studio imprint Deeper, titled “She Done Him Wrong.”

Full Circle Expands 'Dream Doll' Line of Sex Dolls

Full Circle has introduced Dick and Dale from its Dream Doll collection.

Canadian Senator Revives Push for National AV Law

Sen. Julie Miville-Dechêne, whose previous multiple attempts to legislate national age verification requirements all failed, has introduced a new bill that would impose fines of up to $500,000 on adult sites that do not implement age verification for Canadian viewers.

Sarah Arabic, Vicki Chase Topline Dorcel's 'The Next Step'

Sarah Arabic and Vicki Chase star with multi-XMAs winner Seth Gamble in the latest feature from Dorcel, titled “The Next Step.”

Liberator Inks Distro Deal With Osuga

Liberator has signed a deal with Osuga Toys for North American distribution.

FSC Submits Statement to House Committee in Support of FIRM Act

Free Speech Coalition has announced that it submitted a statement to the House Financial Services Committee in support of the Financial Integrity and Regulation Management (FIRM) Act.The announcement follows:

Plaiir Joins Pineapple Support as Supporter-Level Sponsor

Plaiir has joined the ranks of over 70 adult businesses and organizations committing funds and resources to Pineapple Support.

Sabien DeMonia to Drop 'Sabien Ass Fuck'

Evil Angel has announced “Sabien Ass Fuck,” the first title from director/performer Sabien DeMonia.

Trump Tariffs Remain in Effect Pending Appeal of Trade Court Ruling

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Thursday stayed an injunction by the U.S. Court of International Trade, delaying the trade court’s order blocking the Trump administration’s sweeping tariffs, which have significantly impacted the pleasure industry.

FSC Issues Guidance on Kansas Age Verification Suits

The Free Speech Coalition (FSC) has published an advisory article for adult websites operating in Kansas, following several private lawsuits filed under the state's age verification law.

Show More