California Court of Appeal Upholds Dismissal of Former Tech CEO’s Lawsuit Against Journalist Jack Poulson

The California Court of Appeal in San Francisco issued a landmark press freedom decision affirming a lower court's order to strike a defamation and privacy lawsuit filed by former Premise Data chief executive officer Maury Blackman against independent journalist Jack Poulson. The appellate panel held that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and California's Shield Law protect a journalist's publication of lawfully obtained, truthful information regarding matters of public significance. Media law specialists across San Francisco, San Ramon, and the East Bay hailed the ruling as a vital defense for investigative reporting.

The legal dispute originated after Poulson reported details from a San Francisco Police Department incident report documenting Blackman's arrest for felony domestic violence and posted a copy of the police report online after receiving the document from a confidential source. Seeking to force the permanent removal of Poulson's reporting from the internet and recover financial damages, Blackman filed suit against Poulson, publishing platform Substack, Amazon Web Services, and another organization. A San Francisco Superior Court judge initially dismissed the complaint under California's anti-SLAPP statute, which guards against strategic lawsuits against public participation.

Blackman appealed the trial court dismissal to the First District Court of Appeal, arguing that a subsequent state court order sealing his arrest record overrode Poulson's constitutional right to report the news and required retroactive takedowns. Rejecting that argument, the appellate justices ruled that a post-arrest sealing statute does not authorize prior restraints or civil liability against a journalist who lawfully obtained truthful police records. Furthermore, the Court of Appeal affirmed that Substack and the other website hosting the arrest record were fully immunized from civil liability by Section 230 of the federal Communications Decency Act.

Press freedom committees at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the First Amendment Coalition, and journalism department boards in Berkeley and Oakland noted that the ruling prevents wealthy executives from misusing record-sealing laws to censor accurate public-interest journalism. Legal officials emphasized that California's anti-SLAPP framework requires plaintiffs who bring meritless censorship suits to reimburse defendants for their legal defense fees.

Journalists, media attorneys, and civic researchers can read the full appellate opinion and amicus briefs through the California Courts portal at courts.ca.gov or via digital civil liberties archives at eff.org. Legal education workshops examining California's Shield Law and anti-SLAPP protections for independent publishers will be held in San Francisco next month. Inquiries regarding First Appellate District public case files on McAllister Street may be directed to the court clerk's office at (415) 865-7300.