Lawsuit could Unmask Restaurant Critic

Craig LaBan, a restaurant critic for the Philadelphia Inquirer, arrived at Chops Restaurant and Bar to taste their food. However, the result of his tasting did was not to the fancy of the owner, Alex Plotkin. Plotkin is suing LaBan for being an illegitimate food critic and making a false assertion of fact. With much research and evidence from LaBan, an ACTUAL food critic, his notes and receipts show that he was in deed not lying to the courts about his "miserably tough and fatty strip steak." Protected under the First Amendment for his article, LaBan clearly opinionated himself based on his experience. The owner obviously did not enjoy the criticism. But it appears that with this case, LaBan's anonymity may be compromised now that restaurants will familiarize his face with his works. The claim of the owner (ultimately the reason for the suit) was that LaBan had not eaten strip steak, but a steak sandwich without bread. However, new evidence from Plotkin's lawyer shows that it was rib-eye steak, meaning what the critic wrote was false.

Originally I thought that this lawsuit was pretty stupid. I say this because it ultimately seems ridiculous to be suing someone over the kind of steak they reported on. I believe that the critic should not be charged but the restaurant owner because his reasons for suing is so frivolous! The critic is entitled to his own opinion, under the safe guard of the First Amendment and his "false accusation" wouldn't have been false if the restaurant had told him the kind of steak he was ordering to begin with. Because the restaurant had not correctly told him what they gave him is not the critic's fault. Therefore, i think that this case should be ruled so that the critic still has his right to be a food critic and write his opinionated articles. The editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer backs up LaBan by stating that he "dots his i's, he crosses his t's, and anyone who reads his reviews knows that he is meticulous, fastidious and fair as one can be." Even Plotkin's lawyer agrees with LaBan in the sense that he was not given the correct piece of meat that he ordered, being the fault of the restaurant. Overall, I think that this case is useless and time consuming for the courts to hear because the owner did not get his facts straight before suing and he is ultimately jeopardizing the secrecy and privacy of someones' job.