Mariah Carey has emerged victorious in a protracted legal battle with her brother, Morgan Carey, as a judge dismissed his $20 million defamation lawsuit stemming from claims made in her bestselling memoir, The Meaning of Mariah Carey. The ruling, issued by Justice Leslie A. Stroth of the New York State Supreme Court, effectively ends the five-year dispute, finding that Morgan could not prove that Mariah acted with “actual malice” in her statements.
Claims of Defamation
Morgan Carey alleged that Mariah had tarnished his “excellent and spotless reputation” by portraying him as violent and accusing him of drug-related activities, specifically referencing “powdered party favors.” He also claimed that Mariah’s descriptions of his childhood behavioral problems relied on their late mother’s accounts and accused her of prioritizing the commercial success of her memoir over the truth of her statements. He sought damages exceeding $20 million.
Court Findings
In her ruling, Justice Stroth emphasized that Morgan did not adequately demonstrate that Mariah made false statements with the knowledge that they were untrue or with reckless disregard for the truth. Under New York’s anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) law, plaintiffs must show a high level of intent to prove defamation. “Plaintiff has not sufficiently pleaded actual malice on the part of [Mariah],” Stroth stated, noting that evidence of ill will alone is not sufficient to meet the standard for actual malice.
Reactions to the Decision
Mariah’s attorney, John Rosenberg, expressed gratitude for the court’s recognition of the significance of her memoir, stating, “Her memoir addresses significant issues of public interest and dismissed her brother’s defamation claims in their entirety.” He added that the ruling extends beyond Mariah’s personal interests, reinforcing that authors should have broad protections when discussing matters of public concern.
The Legal Battle Continues
Despite the dismissal, Morgan’s legal representation indicated that they intend to appeal the decision. His attorney, Richard Altman, expressed discontent with the ruling, stating that it is “completely inconsistent with prior rulings in the case” and reaffirmed their commitment to continue the fight.
