Our firm handled a case against a local company that cares for disabled adults. We alleged that the negligence of the staff of Didlake, Inc. caused serious injury to a disabled adult, necessitating surgery to install a titanium rod into his leg. Didlake denied the claim, denied it was responsible and took the position that it couldn't be sued because it was a "charitable organization" entitled to charitable immunity.
The trial court ruled that Didlake was right and that this severely disabled adult could not sue it.
We took the case to the Supreme Court of Virginia and lost. We were challenging Didlake's assertion, as a multi-million dollar organization, that it was entitled to "charitable immunity.
Didlake won the argumemt and full credit to them for asserting the winning argument this time.
However, the case is important. In our view charitable immunity is a relic from the dark ages, especially in a world of insurance (which Didlake has) and the fact that the charitable immunity doctrine singles out ONLY those who are receiving the benefit of the charity, and makes them the sacrificial lambs in the interest of something as ill-defined and nebulous as the "public interest."
Anyway, several bloggers picked up on our press release and blogs and of course, there is a court opinion on the case. The opinion is favorable to Didlake.
So its just very interesting that Didlake is trying to convince bloggers to take down factual, truthful, blogs.
Here is Didlake's letter to the attorney blogger.