On April 5, 2010, T&J Towing of Kalamazoo, Michigan, filed a defamation lawsuit  against Justin Kurtz, a 21-year-old student at Western Michigan University. The dispute revolves around Kurtz's creation of a Facebook page called “Kalamazoo Residents against T&J Towing.” T&J seeks $750,000 in damages and a court order that Kurtz “immediately cease and desist any further libelous and slanderous written claims” about the company.

According to press reports, Kurtz created the page days after T&J towed his car from the parking lot of his apartment complex. On the page, Kurtz claims that T&J removed his parking permit and improperly towed his car.  As of the time of writing, the Facebook group had over 13,800 members, many of whom have posted comments about their own negative experiences with the company.

The complaint alleges that Kurtz "has falsely and publicly claimed that Plaintiffs have towed vehicles where no violation has occurred and which claims are untrue." Cmpt. ¶ 4.  It also suggests that Kurtz is responsible for the postings of other Facebook users, alleging that Kurtz "has absolutely no way of knowing whether or not all of the written submissions to his website have any truth or validity." Id.¶ 7.

Kurtz filed an answer on April 30, 2010 and asserted counterclaims for violations of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act and abuse of process.

On April 6, 2010, Generex, a biotechnology company, filed a lawsuit in state court against TheStreet.com, a financial news website, and Adam Feuerstein, a senior columnist, for statements published on the website's Biotech Stock Mailbag about the company.

Generex has been in the process of developing and seeking regulatory approval for Oral-Lyn, an insulin spray treatment for Type-1 and Type-2 diabetes. In two posts published on March 19, 2010 and March 26, 2010, Mr. Feuerstein wrote that "none of the Oral-Lyn data collected by Generex has been peer-reviewed by credible medical journals" and that "the company is using science and the quest to develop an alternative insulin delivery method not to actually help diabetics but as a ruse to perpetuate a 15 year-long stock promotion scheme."

In the complaint, Generex claims that these statements constitute libel, libel per se, product disparagement, and injurious falsehood, and is seeking $250,000,000 in damages.

Walter Milo and Anthony Shelton sued Guy Martin, Bill Cochran, Melvin Douglas, and Sandy Martin, the editors and coordinator of The Conroe Watchdog (collectively "The Watchdog"), a website that describes itself as providing "[t]he unfiltered truth about Conroe politics and your tax dollars."

According to the court on appeal, Milo and Shelton sued for comments posted in October 2006 by anonymous users on a portion of the website titled "Guest Book." These comments referred to Shelton as a "pulpit pimp" and that he drove a $90,000 Hummer, according to the Houston Community Newspapers (HCN). Also according to HCN, the comments also contained allegations that Milo committed a drug crime in 2005 and "cut a deal" with the district attorney, reducing his sentence to probation.

The trial court granted The Watchdog's no-evidence motion for summary judgment in December 2008. The summary judgment was upheld by the Court of Appeals of Texas on April 29, 2010, which pointed to lack of evidence that the anonymous posts were created by The Watchdog and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. According to HCN, this case was the last of three lawsuits claiming defamation against The Watchdog to be resolved. Dixon v. Martin ended in July 2008 when a jury ruled for The Watchdog (see Legal Threat Entry) and a third lawsuit filed by Rigby Owen, Jr. was withdrawn in October 2009.

On April 6, 2010, Warranty Automotive Services Corp. filed a complaint in federal district court against unnamed Does for claims arising out of defendants' operation of a website at www.lifetimewarrantymyths.com. The Complaint indicates that plaintiff believes the defendants may be residents of Connecticut who own or are otherwise affiliated with a car dealership that is a former customer of Warranty Automotive Services, Premier Subaru, LLC of Branford, Connecticut. (Complaint ¶¶ 20-24.)

According to the Complaint, Warranty Automotive Services Corp. sells lifetime warranty services to automotive dealerships, which extend the manufacturer's limited powertrain warranty for new vehicles for as long as the original purchaser of the vehicle owns it. Plaintiff alleges that in January 2010, defendants began publishing a website at www.lifetimewarrantymyths.com that contains a number of false and defamatory statements about plaintiff's services, including allegations that plaintiff "has been guilty of causing 'consumer confusion,' . . . that plaintiff's lifetime warranty is and will be worthless. . . . that plaintiff has been 'fined' by the Federal Trade Commission, and that the warranty which plaintiff markets and sells is a 'marketing tool to compensate for inherent deficiencies in either [plaintiff's] product, their process or both.'" (Complaint ¶ 14.)  The Complaint further alleges that defendants, throught their website, make claims that plaintiff operates a fraudulent "pyramid scheme." (Complaint ¶ 15.)

The Complaint asserts causes of action for (i) defamation; (ii) tortious interference with prospective economic advantage; (iii) trade libel; (iv) unfair business practices in violation fo O.C.G.A. § 10-1-370 et seq.; and (v) violation of the Cyber Piracy Prevention Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d) (based on defendants' "labeling and positioning their website, 'www.lifetimewarrantymyths.com,' and by using metatags, and otherwise" in a manner alleged to have infringed plaintiff's rights in its WASCOR trademark).