This quoted post has been removed.
I am not a lawyer but I can't imagine that you file a case in Arizona Court to get a Magazine publisher in Canada.
Any people here who know how that should work?
Here is the actual lawsuit: Pima-County-Superior-Court-C20256592.-2.pdf
This quoted post has been removed.
I am not a lawyer but I can't imagine that you file a case in Arizona Court to get a Magazine publisher in Canada.
Any people here who know how that should work?
I don't get this. Isn't she American? How can she sue a Canadian magazine? If I write crap about her in Swedish magazine there is nothing she can do about it as long as it doesn't break any Swedish laws, and then she can file a complaint at the Swedish police.
What strange strange people.
I get it this is a running website but this has to be one of the most bizarre things in sport I can remember. Especially for a niche subcategory for a sport that literally no one cares about. She broke records for things that only a handful of people have ever attempted.
I would love a comparable controversy. Like distance roller skiing, or a good stand up paddle boarding drama.
minong wrote:
I read through this. First, I hope her attorneys got paid upfront, because this lawsuit is going to get tossed immediately.
Second, this is just another example of people willing to denigrate others with a legitimate affliction (ADHD) as incapable of ethical behavior. Which should absolutely piss off anyone in that group. The entire suit is predicated on believing she's incapable of knowing right from wrong because of ADHD.
Third, ultimately she's so misguided in this attempt to what, get her reputation back through this ridiculous lawsuit? How does this help? What sponsor would possibly go near at this point even when the PR side of this cools down knowing she'll sue for just about any reason?
This is grasping at straws. I have no idea, but I can only assume money must be getting tight for them, so why not give this a shot.
"...were published with actual malice for the specific purpose of damaging Camille’s good name, standing, and reputation in the ultrarunning community"
#spits water out on the desk# I think it ought to be thrown out just for this line tbh.
That and the fact that it's happening over a year later, seemingly out of desperation. Did she just want the story to go global and marinate in everyone's consciousness for a year before eventually seeking legal action? Generally people like to clear these things up quickly, but when it first broke she shut down her socials and her husband sent a statement days (rather than hours) later as I recall. You'd like to think the initial denial and the eventual lawsuit would be a bit quicker out of the gate?
stressylegs wrote:
1) anyone able to summarise what this is about?
We were sent a full copy of the lawsuit. We put it into ChatGPT and asked it to summarize it for us. Here is their 4 paragraph article that they came up with. Please note this is from AI and might include inaccuracies/falsehoods, etc. Blame ChatGPT for anything - not LetsRun.
ChatGPT wrote wrote:
Ultrarunner Camille Herron Sues Canadian Running Magazine Over Wikipedia Scandal Report
World-record-holding ultramarathoner Camille Herron has filed a defamation lawsuit against Gripped Publishing, the parent company of Canadian Running Magazine, in Pima County Superior Court, Arizona, alleging that the magazine falsely accused her of manipulating Wikipedia pages to exaggerate her achievements and diminish those of other elite runners. The September 2024 article, titled “U.S. Ultrarunner Camille Herron Involved in Wikipedia Controversy,” claimed that Wikipedia edits were traced to Herron’s email and IP address—allegations she insists are completely untrue.
According to the 90-page complaint, Herron’s husband and coach, Conor Holt, had long managed her Wikipedia page and was solely responsible for any edits, which he says followed Wikipedia’s sourcing and neutrality rules. The suit alleges that Canadian Running and reporter Marley Dickinson published the story using unverified online gossip, misattributed information, and quotes from conflicted sources such as ultrarunning organizer Trishul Cherns, with whom Herron had clashed over race-sanctioning rules. Herron also contends the outlet ignored her diagnosed AuDHD (autism and ADHD), published the story while she was traveling for a major race, and later republished it as one of its “Top Running Stories of 2024,” compounding the damage.
Herron says the article triggered a cascade of professional and personal fallout: she lost sponsorships—including a lucrative Lululemon ambassador deal—faced harassment online and within the ultrarunning community, and suffered severe mental-health distress. The complaint describes lasting emotional trauma, financial losses, and reputational harm, arguing that Canadian Running acted with actual malice and reckless disregard for the truth. She seeks compensatory and punitive damages and has requested a jury trial.
Canadian Running Magazine would be expected to argue that its reporting was based on publicly available data and credible sources, and that it acted within its rights as a news organization covering a matter of public interest. The publication will likely invoke journalistic privilege and free-press protections, asserting that any inaccuracies were unintentional or non-defamatory. As Herron is a public figure, the defense is expected to emphasize the high legal threshold of “actual malice,” and to point out that Holt himself publicly acknowledged editing Wikipedia pages related to Herron, which the magazine may frame as justification for its reporting.
Here is the full lawsuit if it's not already linked :
https://www.letsrun.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Pima-County-Superior-Court-C20256592.-2.pdf
This is Canadian Running Magazine... emphasis on the magazine... how much could they legitimately be worth nowadays? If in some ludicrous world Camille got awarded $2mil in damages, or hell, even $200k in damages, could the magazine even pay that or would they simply declare bankruptcy, fold, and leave her with scraps?
My guess she is angling for a quick settlement, maybe something like $50k and an apology so that she can feel better about herself and use it to defend herself.
This quoted post has been removed.
I think she’s liberal (her comments about being a trailblazer for women, autistic, adhd etc) but it reads like a Trump lawsuit - you said something I don’t like, now pay up for defamation. Unfortunately for her, she isn’t the president and doesn’t control anything important (e.g. paying a $16 million bribe settlement, when you want your $8 billion merger approved). She’ll be laughed out of court
ELTON\'S PORTABLE JOHN wrote:
This is Canadian Running Magazine... emphasis on the magazine... how much could they legitimately be worth nowadays? If in some ludicrous world Camille got awarded $2mil in damages, or hell, even $200k in damages, could the magazine even pay that or would they simply declare bankruptcy, fold, and leave her with scraps?
My guess she is angling for a quick settlement, maybe something like $50k and an apology so that she can feel better about herself and use it to defend herself.
I think you're right that what they're really hoping for is for Gripped/Canadian Running to decide, "this isn't worth the legal expenses to deal with" and either (1) ignore it (default judgment?) or (2) agree to print some kind of apology or clarification (which would be absurd but it's their call).
On (1), Gripped seems big enough -- though not big by any stretch -- that my guess that they respond. But if they didn't, I don't know really anything about the hoops involved in enforcing a US judgment in Canada other than to know that it's possible but does it essentially get re-litigated by a Canadian provincial court? I don't care enough to try to dig into it.
In both cases, I suspect that the goal is to get something so that Herron and Holt can trumpet to the world: "we were wronged! It was false! See, we won a default judgment! See, they printed a clarification!" They obviously care deeply about the optics, though I don't think that's going to help them much in the court of public opinion.
No they don’t need a lawyer. Arizona has no jurisdiction over a Canadian company. She would have to file in Canada. She makes an extremely weak attempt to claim jurisdiction, saying that because an Arizona resident was sent emails from the Canadian company, Arizona has jurisdiction. Not it does not.
assuming the Canadian magazine is based in Canada & not the USA I assume their laws are different for defamation?
195. Defendant Canadian Running acted with an evil mind and with such
aggravated and outrageous conduct that punitive damages are warranted
Surely a lawyer did not write this
9 posts were removed from this page.