BUTLER – A defamation lawsuit brought by a Western Pennsylvania attorney and former Butler County District Attorney independent candidate accuses the sitting District Attorney, a local mayor and other residents of damaging her personal and professional reputations with scandalous and false information, but those parties have subsequently denied defaming the plaintiff.
Jen GV Gilliland Vanasdale of Cranberry Township filed suit in the Butler County Court of Common Pleas on Nov. 17 versus Butler County District Attorney Richard A. Goldinger of Valencia, Justin Castilyn of Saxonburg and Butler County Republican Committee Members Cheryl Guenther of Prospect and JonDavid Longo, the Mayor of Slippery Rock.
Gilliland Vanasdale, a practicing attorney since 2001 and founder of the Gilliland Vanasdale Sinatra Istik law firm since 2002, operates offices in both Cranberry Township and Butler.
“Plaintiff and her law office have handled thousands of cases, including criminal law, during the past 22 years in practice and never had a professional liability claim brought by a client against her or her law firm. Plaintiff was named as an additional defendant in one lawsuit in 2011, involving a complex matter that she was handling for her client, who was sued by his deceased father’s third wife claiming funds in excess to a prenuptial agreement. This lawsuit was withdrawn and discontinued by the defendant without any monies paid by plaintiff (or her law office) and the matter was sealed in the Butler County Court of Common Pleas, due in part to the wealth of the plaintiff and his real estate holdings,” the suit said.
“Plaintiff was also a victim of a fraudulent and defamatory per se matter in 2019 that attempted to cause damage to plaintiff’s reputation, extort money and more. Plaintiff reported both a leak of the sealed lawsuit and the attempted fraud for investigation to District Attorney Richard A. Goldinger and his Detective on or around July 23, 2021. DA Goldinger’s office did not solve the crime(s) and advised plaintiff not to pursue since no one was aware of the 2019 matter as the lawsuit associated with the same was not served or published.”
The 2019 matter referred to by the plaintiff, Bell v. Vanasdale in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas, shows as dismissed on Sept. 20, 2022, via Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 230.2 – which serves to terminate a case when no docket activity has taken place within a two-year period. The lawsuit was never served during its pendency.
The suit added that within one day of circulating a nominating petition announcing her candidacy for District Attorney and herself as an independent candidate to challenge defendant Goldinger for that office, a congressional staffer received a copy of the 2019 lawsuit from defendant Guenther.
According to the plaintiff, the “2019 fraudulent and fake lawsuit is defamation per se against plaintiff, as it is outrageous and wrongfully and falsely alleges criminal offenses, business misconduct and serious sexual misconduct – and claimed that plaintiff sexually assaulted a Black man from Homestead, PA with a confidential mailing address connected to defendant Castilyn.”
“One of said allegations includes that plaintiff ‘wanted to perform oral sex’ (on the fake plaintiff) and that plaintiff was ‘entitled to be repaid the favor of her pro bono legal representation.’ This is patently, outrageously, and egregiously false and is defamation per se. The fake lawsuit then goes on to falsely claim that plaintiff ‘proceeded to perform oral sex...despite resistance’ from the fake plaintiff. This is patently, outrageously, and egregiously false and is defamation per se. The fake lawsuit also alleged that plaintiff had a lawsuit sealed so ‘that nobody would see what she (referring to plaintiff) did to a minor child.’ This is patently, outrageously, and egregiously false and is defamation per se. The fake lawsuit wrongfully claimed that plaintiff would hold a ‘Jennifer party’ for ‘select clients so they could repay the favor for her providing pro bono legal representation.’ This is patently, outrageously and egregiously false and is defamation per se,” the suit stated.
“The identity of the plaintiff in the fake lawsuit involves identity theft, while the demand for money is excess of $250,000, seeks to be paid to 221 Neupert Road in Cabot, PA, 16023, which is an address affiliated with defendant Castilyn. Defendant Castilyn has a long criminal record, involving sexual statutory assault of a minor, forgery, theft by deception and false impression, receiving stolen property and more. Upon information and belief, DA Goldinger or someone affiliated with him initiated publication of this lawsuit by notifying defendant Guenther, or one of her agents, with the intent to publish to harm plaintiff. Defendant Guenther, and all defendants, knew, or should have known, that the lawsuit and allegations were outrageous and false, yet she still published to harm plaintiff and to deter third persons from associating or dealing with plaintiff.”
The plaintiff further alleged that defendant Goldinger authored a letter which he published to his personal Facebook page on Oct. 12, stating that the plaintiff had never appeared in criminal court, could not practice in front of any sitting judges in Butler County and visiting judges would have to hear every criminal proceeding in Butler County if the plaintiff were elected, charges the plaintiff maintained are both false and defamatory.
Additionally, the plaintiff stated that defendants Castilyn, Guenther and Longo “commented, encouraged and published these defamation per se statements as well, to include comment on Longo’s publication of this letter.”
“On Oct. 12, 2023, defendant Castilyn posted online ‘sealed lawsuit there she (referring to plaintiff) stole like a hundred grand or was accused of it and settled...’ and upon information and belief defendant Guenther (via Butler Local Politics) replied, ‘We sit here waiting for you to post info…election day is coming up. May be next week as the election gets closer.’ Defendant Longo follows and is friends on this page, as is defendant Goldinger. Defendant Goldinger also personally interacts and campaigns with defendants Guenther and Longo. Defendant Castilyn then posted on Oct. 22, 2023 falsely claiming, ‘This is one of five lawsuits she has had sealed.’ which includes a comment from the public: ‘How does she even still have her license to practice law??????The PASC should have suspended it!’ Defendant Castilyn also posted on Oct. 23, 2023 the sealed lawsuit from 2011, along with the following defamation per se statement: ‘A source tells me Vanasdale settled the lawsuit by paying a $40,000 settlement - as well as she agreed to pay attorney fees to the other side. As well as some fees for money that was ‘missing...As well as when the estate was settled, $62,000 was missing from the estate... Butler News tried to obtain transcripts and other information with all of the sealed cases Vanasdale has. But has been unsuccessful. I personally met with an attorney who told me it might be possible to have these lawsuits unsealed via the courts. But the costs would be in excess of $10,000…remember this on November 7th when you cast your vote,” the suit said.
“Defendants knew of each other’s tortious conduct and substantially assisted each other in conducting their tortious conduct. The defendants engaged in a campaign to publish lies in contradiction to the truth and facts set forth above to damage plaintiff s reputation, deter others from associating with plaintiff, and interfere with an election for District Attorney. Defendants’ publication of these statements has greatly injured plaintiff, and her reputation within the community, and has caused humiliation and harm as a licensed attorney with a law business in the community. Damages are presumed due to the defamation per se involving false claims of criminal offense, business misconduct and sexual misconduct and the malice associated with the same. Plaintiff is entitled to damages and other relief as a result of the intentional actions of the defendants. These statements are outrageous, malicious, and reckless and well as false, and therefore entitle plaintiff to recover punitive damages.”
The plaintiff added that the defendants allegedly aided and abetted each other in an attempt to influence the result of the District Attorney election.
Each of the defendants filed briefs outlining preliminary objections to Gilliland Vanasdale’s lawsuit – with Goldinger filing on Dec. 8, Longo on Dec. 12, Castilyn on Dec. 14 and Guenther on Dec. 15.
“In the case at issue, the plaintiff is claiming that the defendant Goldinger defamed the plaintiff during the course of a campaign where both parties were running for district attorney of Butler County. The subject case is not about the election itself, election interference or an attempt to overturn the results of an election. Rather, the lawsuit is about whether or not the plaintiff was defamed during the course of the campaign and election process,” per Goldinger’s brief, who sought the aiding and abetting count to be dismissed with prejudice.
“Therefore, allegations such as those contained...relating to voter intimidation and...where it is alleged that defendant Goldinger scared the electorate are immaterial, impertinent and scandalous. Likewise, the allegation that defendants did not report campaign expenditures associated with alleged defamatory activity to influence the election...is both immaterial and scandalous. The allegations set forth in the preliminary objections are on their face, impertinent and scandalous and should be stricken with prejudice.”
In Longo’s brief, he sought dismissal of the counts against him and the complaint in its entirety for lack of legal sufficiency in pleading.
“The complaint is based upon alleged defamatory statements made by the defendants in the weeks leading up to the 2023 general election. As it specifically relates to defendant Longo, the complaint alleges that Longo posted a link to a letter published online by defendant Goldinger. The complaint also references certain lawsuits that were either sealed or withdrawn, and to which plaintiff was apparently either a party or an attorney of record; the same are not attached to the complaint. Moreover, the complaint is largely comprised of vague and conclusory statements that, even if true, would fail to provide a right to relief for plaintiff,” according to Longo’s brief.
“Plaintiff’s failure to separate the allegations against each defendant has made it difficult to ascertain what, exactly, Vanasdale is alleging against any of the defendants, specifically. Plaintiff’s complaint is legally insufficient, insufficiently specific to proceed, and fails to comply with the law in several respects. Even when viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the complaint fails to meet the most basic elements of the claims asserted. As a result, defendant Longo seeks dismissal of plaintiff’s claims against him.”
Castilyn’s brief lodged similar preliminary objections to the lawsuit.
“The complaint alleges defamatory statements made by the defendants during the 2023 general election, specifically plaintiff’s candidacy for the Butler County District Attorney position for which defendant Goldinger was running as the incumbent candidate. As it relates to defendant Castilyn, plaintiff alleges that Castilyn is associated with a fake lawsuit that was filed with the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas in 2019, that he published a letter written by and initially published online by defendant Goldinger, that he posted a sealed lawsuit in which plaintiff was involved,” according to Castilyn’s brief.
“The lawsuits that plaintiff raises in her complaint whereby she was either a party or the attorney of record were not attached to her complaint. The allegations in her complaint are largely vague, conclusory, scandalous and impertinent, disorganized, and delusional in nature for which no reply or defense can be formed by defendant as it is unknown what exactly plaintiff is alleging against defendant Castilyn or the other defendants. Plaintiff failed to separate the allegations against each defendant, making it difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain what, exactly, Vanasdale is alleging against any defendant, specifically. Plaintiff’s complaint is legally insufficient, riddled with scandalous and impertinent statements, is insufficiently specific to proceed and fails to comply with even the basic rules of law in several respects. Even when viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff, the complaint fails to meet the basic elements of the claims raised. Because of plaintiff’s complete lack of specificity or conformity with the basic rules of court, Castilyn seeks dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint, in whole, with prejudice.”
Defendant Guenther also sought dismissal of the claims with prejudice, arguing that the plaintiff’s complaint mentions three documents, the 2011 lawsuit, the 2019 lawsuit and Goldinger’s letter published on social media, but none of which were attached to the complaint. It was also argued that nothing pertaining to Guenther’s communications was illegal or defamatory.
“These are not paragraphs that supply material facts. They are simply paragraphs that make innuendos out of the obvious – elected Republican Committee Members work with and assist Republican candidates. There is absolutely nothing nefarious or tortious about these communications. Nevertheless, that is really all there is as to Ms. Guenther’s conduct, and after that there is just bald, conclusory allegations that the ‘defendants’ interact with each other; ‘Defendants’ knew of each other's ‘tortious’ acts; ‘Defendants engaged in a campaign to publish lies’; as well as more bald, conclusory allegations that ‘defendants’ have satisfied various supposed elements of the four counts,” per Guenther’s brief, in part.
“In short, defendant Cheryl Guenther is entitled to a more specific complaint that lays out the material facts that show what she has done to satisfy the various elements of the tort claims (aside from simply providing a public document that plaintiff Vanasdale claims contains false statements to Congressman Kelley’s office). Boilerplate allegations that she acted with all other defendants to defame plaintiff and that she knew of the falsity of the two public documents and the statements made in the District Attorney’s campaign literature are not enough. As noted in the next objection (which is a demurer to all counts) it is plaintiff Vanasdale’s burden to prove (by clear and convincing evidence) the falsity of these documents and to prove that Ms. Guenther knew of that falsity. Just pleading unsupported conclusions that documents plaintiff did not attach are false, and Ms. Guenther knew of their falsity, without pleading facts that support both of those conclusions is insufficient and is like pleading someone is liable for negligence without pleading the conduct.”
Guenther stated she was “entitled to a complaint that sets forth facts showing what she did; facts that show that the two public documents filed in government offices (with appropriate signed verification) contained materially false information; facts that show how Ms. Guenther knew that facts that show the District Attorney’s campaign letter contained materially false information; facts that show Ms. Guenther knew that; and the facts that show the ‘who, what, when and where’ Ms. Guenther ever agreed with anyone to engage in or assist in knowingly tortious conduct.”
For counts of defamation/libel per se, defamation by implication, false light and aiding and abetting tortious conduct, the plaintiff is seeking, jointly and severally, damages in excess of $35,000 and other relief as deemed appropriate.
The plaintiff is representing herself from Gilliland Vanasdale Sinatra Istik Law Office, in Cranberry Township.
Defendant Goldinger is represented by Michael E. Lang of Margolis Edelstein in Beaver, defendant Longo is represented by Rebecca L. Black and S.J. Milliron of Lutz Pawk & Black in Butler, and defendants Castilyn and Guenther are representing themselves in this matter.
Butler County Court of Common Pleas case 2023-10969
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com