Case Outline

Outline

– The plantiff, Broker’s Choice of America Inc., operates as an IMO. As an IMO, they enter into agreements with insurance companies in order to market their insurance products. The IMO then recruits and makes the insurance products available to independent licensed insurance agents who then, market these products to consumers. BCA was founded by Plaintiff Tyrone M. Clark.

– The defendant, NBC Universal,  produces  television report broadcasts on Dateline NBC. One specific show focused on the predatory sales tactics that were being used in the sale of equity-indexed annuities to senior citizens. This report provided information on training sessions for insurance agents held by BCA by the name “Annuity University”.  Annuity University is a two-day training session that BCA offers to insurance agents on the sale of annuities, depicting the most effective methods to sell. These sessions are not open to the public but NBC cameras were allowed in to observe.

In 2007, Dateline ran an investigation into the tactics used by insurance agents selling EIAs to senior citizens. As part of the investigation, Dateline arranged for volunteers in Arizona and Alabama to pose as potential customers of insurance agents. These volunteers were equipped with hidden cameras to record the agents’ sales pitches. During the sales pitches, the insurance agents failed to disclose the risks associated with EIAs, including the substantial penalties for withdrawing the funds before their maturity dates.

– The Issue: In their original complaint, the Plaintiffs filed: defamation, trespass, fraud, intrusion against the defendants. On June 1, 2009 the defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss for failure to state claims upon which relief could be granted. On October 22, 2009 the Court granted the Motion to Dismiss, without prejudice. But, on November 20, 2009 the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. The primary difference between the factual allegations in the original and in the amended complaint are that the amended one includes actual statements from a sales training seminar in March 2007 and the plaintiffs’ original claims for trespass, fraud and intrusion are no longer alleged, meaning, the plaintiffs now alleges only two claims for relief.

Administration-

Clark and Hansen should both testify. As both the heads of the opposing groups and the leaders for these specific programs, they should both testify as to what the intent and process was. However, the undercover “customers” and the material they collected should be put on the stand as well because their information was taken without explicit consent of the BCA.

While the case was initially dismissed due to insufficient evidence, it’s retrial comes at the reconsideration of a case that was dismissed prematurely. The dismissal is considered premature because there is stock in BCA’s claims that the evidence found was collected illegally and published with malicious intent to defame Clark and BCA’s reputation. The violation of privacy and the innate rights that accompany it are at risk here but also, the media’s rights to perform as the watchdog of big business and inform the public of violations. However, the problem remains, was it obtained and produced legally?

http://co.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20110111_0000255.DCO.htm/qx

https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/opinions/11/11-1042.pdf

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/elder_law/2014/07/10th-circuit-defamation-case-can-go-forward-on-nbcs-dateline-on-annuity-university.html

2 thoughts on “Case Outline

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *