A judge has declined to set aside a judgment in favor of Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, and against a candidate who unsuccessfully challenged the veteran politician for her seat in November 2020 and sued the veteran politician for defamation.
Joe E. Collins III alleged the 87-year-old congresswoman’s campaign materials and radio commercials falsely stated that the Navy veteran was dishonorably discharged. Collins said he served honorably for 13 1/2 years in the Navy, receiving decorations and commendations.
Last May, Judge Kerry Bensinger granted Waters’ attorneys’ motion to dismiss the case, noting that Collins’ attorneys had not filed an opposition to the motion. Judgment was entered on Waters’ behalf a month later.
However, on Dec. 29 Collins’ lawyer, Ronda Baldwin-Kennedy, filed a motion to vacate the dismissal and reinstate her client’s case. In her court papers, Baldwin-Kennedy said that she suffered from “mental incapacity” at the time, including post-traumatic stress disorder and major depression. She also said she experienced the “traumatic murder” of her co-counsel in the case and that the strain impaired her ability to represent Collins.
“I attempted to fulfill my responsibilities to all my clients during this period, but I admit that my functional capacity was severely diminished,” Baldwin-Kennedy stated in her court papers.
Baldwin-Kennedy further said that she did not file an opposition to Waters’ dismissal motion because she thought one had already been brought and that she lost track of the rapidly approaching deadline for last May’s dismissal hearing.
But in his Wednesday ruling, Judge Brock T. Hammond, who is now presiding over the case, said Baldwin-Kennedy had only a reasonable time to ask for relief for the judgment, but she instead waited more than six months.
In May 2023, a three-justice panel of the Second District Court of Appeal unanimously reversed an April 2021 ruling by now-retired Judge Yolanda Orozco. In dismissing Collins’ case, Orozco told his attorney that she did not come close to proving actual malice, the standard of proof needed for a public figure like Collins. In his subsequent ruling, Bensinger also concluded that Collins’ lawyers failed to demonstrate malice.
Waters’ dismissal motion before Orozco was based on the state’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) law, which is intended to prevent people from using courts, and potential threats of a lawsuit, to intimidate those who are exercising their First Amendment rights. The congresswoman’s motion before Bensinger simply argued that there were no triable issues.
According to the suit, in September 2020, the Citizens for Waters campaign published a two-sided piece of literature with an “unflattering” photo of Collins that stated, “Republican candidate Joe Collins was dishonorably discharged, played politics and sued the U.S. military. He doesn’t deserve military dog tags or your support.”
The reverse side of the ad had a photo of Waters and text complimenting her for her record with veterans, according to the plaintiff.
The dishonorable discharge statement was false because Collins left the Navy by a general discharge under honorable conditions, the suit filed in September 2020 stated.
In a sworn declaration in favor of dismissing the suit, Waters stated that the dishonorable discharge information was obtained from a decision by U.S. District Court Judge Michael Anello regarding a case Collins had against the Navy when Anello was a lawyer.