patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Councilman Sues Law Prof for Vegetarian Bias Article

'Of Meat and Manhood' is defamatory, lawsuit filed by Robert Catalanello alleges.

 

Madison Borough Councilman Robert Catalanello has filed a lawsuit claiming statements in a law review article alleging he discriminated against a former employee at their investment company for being vegetarian are false and defamatory.

A 2011 Washington University Law Review article titled "Of Meat and Manhood" discusses a complaint that was brought against Catalanello and Credit Agricole CIB by former employee Ryan Pacifico in 2009. Pacifico's lawsuit was withdrawn this summer.

Pacifico sued after he was fired, claiming he was subjected to taunts and harrassment about his sexuality and being vegetarian after Catalanello learned he did not eat meat. The case drew widespread media attention when it was filed and became a central topic Zachary Kramer's law review article.

Credit Agricole and Catalanello denied the allegations and Pacifico's lawsuit was withdrawn with prejudice this summer. Pacifico paid his own attorney and legal fees, and he can't bring the claims again in another lawsuit, according to court documents.

"The underlying lawsuit was discontineud by the plaintiff with prejudice, and without the receipt of any money or anything like that," said Thomas Cafferty of Gibbons PC, Catalanello's attorney.

Catalanello's lawsuit was filed Dec. 28 in federal court in New Jersey. It lists Kramer, Washington University, and Western New England University School of Law, which hosted video of a lecture Kramer gave there referencing the article, as defendants.

ABAJournal.com, National Law Journal and Courthouse News Service have written about the defamation lawsuit Catalanello filed.

In "Of Meat and Manhood," Kramer argues that while "vegetarianism and sexual orientation are not protected under existing employment discrimination norms," the law does protect against discrimination because of gender stereotyping, which he alleges is what Catalanello did.

Kramer writes, "vegetarianism and sexual orientation merely served as proxies for the real reason Catalanello and others discriminated against Pacifico — he failed to conform to the their idea of a 'real' man is supposed to look and act."

The lawsuit quotes 20 excerpts from the article that it says are false and defamatory.

A message seeking comment from Kramer, a professor at the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law in Tempe, Ariz., was not returned. Catalanello declined to comment. He is a managing director with Credit Agricole.

Related Topics: Lawsuit, Of Meat and Manhood, Robert Catalanello, and Zachary Kramer

Alice Jameson

9:19 pm on Monday, January 7, 2013

Professor Kramer’s article is irrefutable proof that academia adores idiots.

Reply

Catherine with a K

9:11 am on Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Sounds like Catalanello got slimed by this former employee and then again by this so called Professor. And now he's fighting back. Good for him.

From the little I know of him, Catalanello can be a bit gruff, but I've never seen ANYTHING to suggest he's a homophobe or bigoted in anyway.

And, for what it is worth, the idea of a vegetarian filing a lawsuit for being ribbed about their dietary sources is asinine, in my humble opinion.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Thomas Forrest Ritter

3:52 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013

Maybe. Or maybe every allegation in the original lawsuit is true and Catalanello is a bigot with an unimpressive vocabulary. Who can say at this point?
Either way, it should be entertaining to watch this waste of money progress through the system.

The Good Guy

9:11 am on Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Politicians and leaders don't run the world, lawyers do. The reason for all our problems.

Reply

J

7:23 pm on Tuesday, January 8, 2013

As a former law review editor, I would have requested that the author include a footnote explicitly stating that the case was ongoing, that Catalanello denied the allegations of Pacifico's complaint, and that the article was an intellectual exercise to determine whether or not Pacifico had a valid claim if we assumed that everything in his complaint was actually true. To my surprise, I found no such statement in the article (though I skimmed through it very quickly and may have missed it). OTOH, the small readership for law reviews consists entirely of lawyers, judges, law professors and law students, all of whom would know this without being told.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Thomas Forrest Ritter

3:52 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013

In the beginning of the article the author refers to the case against Catalanello as "ongoing".

len grasso

8:20 pm on Tuesday, January 8, 2013

I know neither of the parties to this litigation.

Perhaps the vegetarian thought that being called or being gay was an insult and so did the councilman.

I am a vegetarian, have been for many years. I would not be offended if someone thought that eating tofu was a gay activity. Food as a sexual preference indicator? Long shot.

I always thought that stock, stock option and fixed income traders were money-grubbers.

Is there a lawsuit in that?

Reply

Pete

11:32 am on Sunday, January 13, 2013

How do you spell FRIVOLOUS ???

Reply

Jeff Doorn

11:04 am on Monday, January 14, 2013

Oh it starts with an "F" but there is always a "you" in there somewhere!

Reply

len grasso

11:04 am on Monday, January 14, 2013

Knowing that journalists skip over details that can color the underlying truths and one's opinion of what is really going on, we will have only speculation.

I wish them both well.

Reply

Leave a comment