Judge Dismisses Tony Bobulinski’s $30 Million Defamation Lawsuit Against Jessica Tarlov, Awards Attorney’s Fees

A federal judge in New York has dismissed Tony Bobulinski’s $30 million defamation lawsuit against Fox News co-host Jessica Tarlov and ruled that Bobulinski must pay Tarlov’s attorney’s fees under New York’s anti-SLAPP law.

Có thể là hình ảnh về một hoặc nhiều người, kính mắt, phòng tin tức và văn bản cho biết 'THE FIVE'In a written decision, U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken granted Tarlov’s motion to dismiss, concluding that the complaint failed to state a legally sufficient defamation claim. The judge also ruled that New York’s mandatory fee-shifting provision under its anti-SLAPP statute applies in federal court, entitling Tarlov to recover her legal costs.

“Before the Court is Tarlov’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and motion for attorney’s fees under New York’s anti-SLAPP law,” Judge Oetken wrote. “For the reasons that follow, the motion to dismiss is granted… Tarlov’s motion for attorney’s fees is also granted.”

Following the ruling, a Fox News spokesperson welcomed the outcome, describing it as a significant legal victory.

“FOX News is pleased with the court’s landmark decision, which not only dismissed Tony Bobulinski and Stefan Passantino’s meritless allegations against Jessica Tarlov, but also marks the first federal court decision to award attorney’s fees under New York’s anti-SLAPP statute,” the spokesperson said.

The lawsuit stemmed from comments Tarlov made during a January episode of The Five, in which she discussed Bobulinski’s appearance before Congress. During the segment, she stated that “a Trump Super PAC paid for Tony Bobulinski’s lawyers’ fees.”

Bobulinski, a former business associate of Hunter Biden, denied the claim. His attorney, Jesse Binnall, immediately demanded that Tarlov retract the statement and issue an on-air apology, warning that a defamation lawsuit would follow if no correction was made.

The following day, Tarlov addressed the issue during another broadcast, clarifying her remarks.

She explained that what had been established during the congressional hearing was that the law firm representing Bobulinski had received payments from a Trump political action committee. She added that she had seen no evidence indicating those payments specifically covered Bobulinski’s personal legal fees and acknowledged that Bobulinski denied they were connected.

Despite the clarification, Bobulinski’s legal team requested an additional retraction and apology. Fox News declined, maintaining that Tarlov’s correction accurately reflected the available information and stating that no further correction would be issued.

Bobulinski subsequently filed suit, seeking $30 million in compensatory, special, and punitive damages, along with legal costs and attorney’s fees.

In its defense, Fox News argued that Tarlov had promptly clarified her statement and accurately explained the distinction between payments made to a law firm and payments for Bobulinski’s own legal expenses. The network maintained that the correction fully addressed the issue and vowed to defend the lawsuit.

After reviewing the case, Judge Oetken rejected Bobulinski’s claims. The court found that the complaint failed to establish the legal elements required for defamation under New York law.

The judge also concluded that Bobulinski had not sufficiently demonstrated that Tarlov’s statements harmed his professional reputation in a manner required to support a claim of defamation per se. Citing New York precedent, Oetken noted that such claims require statements alleging conduct directly incompatible with a person’s profession, rather than broader criticism of an individual’s character or reputation.

The decision not only ends Bobulinski’s lawsuit against Tarlov but also reinforces the protections afforded by New York’s anti-SLAPP statute, which is designed to discourage lawsuits that may chill speech on matters of public interest. By awarding attorney’s fees to Tarlov, the court underscored the statute’s fee-shifting provision, making the ruling notable beyond the dispute itself.

Unless successfully appealed, the decision brings the high-profile defamation case to a close, marking a significant legal victory for Jessica Tarlov and Fox News.