Dr. Jane Ruby & Dr. Peter Breggin come out triumphant, Malone may have legal fees to pay

ER Editor: Victory laps for Dr. Jane Ruby and Dr. Peter and his wife Ginger Breggin. Each was being sued for $25 million. Their responses are below.

Malone’s case against the Washington Post was also thrown out a little while back by the same judge. Hence Malone should have thought better about continuing to pursue the same type of case against Ruby and the Breggins. See this from Oct. 2 2023 —

Judge Dismisses Robert Malone Vs. Washington Post Defamation Lawsuit

Charles C. Wright also picked up this moment. We recommend his substack account. See —

Robert Malone’s Suit Against the Breggins and Jane Ruby – Dismissed

********

Dr. Ruby unpacks the particular details of her own case, including her counter filings against Robert Malone in the short video below.

Of note is that these cases have been going on for 18 months, which has been a large chunk of time in which to try to shut down genuine medical truthers such as Ruby and the Breggins, placing stress on them and their families, as well as depleting their resources. As we know, there are fake truthers out there giving us only partial information about ‘mRNA’, ‘salt crystals’, etc., who are not revealing the transhumanist nature of the vaccine-as-bioweapon.

This is the link to Dr. Jane Ruby’s website, with the tab Malone vs Ruby. 

‘A hero doesn’t sue people on his own side. That should have been your first clue.’

Source

****

But this was no mere technicality. Of critical importance, the Judge then granted a request by defendants’ attorneys to consider whether Dr. Robert Malone should be forced to pay the attorney fees of the defendants.

Judge Moon had previously threatened in writing to declare the Malone v. Breggin suit frivolous, and to force Malone to pay the legal fees if he did not stop pursuing it.[2] In what seems like direct defiance of the judge, Malone continued the suit until it was dismissed today, which underscores the possibility that Judge Moon might order the repayment of the legal fees of the Breggins and Jane Ruby.

The Judge’s warning to Malone was over two months ago when the Judge dismissed Robert Malone’s defamation lawsuit against The Washington Post. He directed the clerk, “STRIKE this case from the docket.” The Judge stated at the time “if Plaintiff [Dr. Malone] continues to bring defamation actions like those that have been dismissed, there will come a time when his lawsuits might fairly be deemed frivolous and awarding attorney fees is appropriate.” In a footnote, the judge indicated he was specifically mentioning Malone v. Breggin as well as Malone v. Twitter.

We estimate it will take at least another 45 days for the judge to resolve whether or not Malone must pay the legal fees for the Breggins and Jane Ruby. But Robert Malone’s case against the Breggins and Jane Ruby has been terminated by the judge.

---

[1] Document-64,-Dec-11-2023-19114810498.pdf (breggin.com)

[2] Judge Dismisses Robert Malone Vs. Washington Post Defamation Lawsuit (substack.com)

Source

************

Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.