(Updated to include comment from Rose)
A judge on Tuesday dismissed Senate Majority Leader Jim Denning’s defamation lawsuit against newspaper columnist Steve Rose.
Johnson County Judge Paul Gurney ruled that Denning failed to show that he would prevail on the merits of his defamation claim against Rose over a column about the senator’s opposition to Medicaid expansion.
He awarded attorney fees to Rose. They could total close to about $50,000, Rose’s lawyer said Tuesday afternoon.
A 2016 state law intended to discourage lawsuits aimed at limiting free speech on matters of public interest requires Denning to show a likelihood of prevailing on his claim.
“Justice prevailed today over a frivolous lawsuit,” Rose said in a statement.
“It’s great to live in a country where there’s still freedom of the press, unlike so many countries who are losing that freedom.”
Earlier this month, Gurney dismissed Denning’s lawsuit against The Kansas City Star over the same column after he found the newspaper didn’t have malice toward the senator. The Star was awarded an estimated $40,000 in that case.
Denning had argued that Rose fabricated paraphrased statements attributed to him in a Jan. 26 column criticizing his views on Medicaid expansion. Denning said he hadn’t spoken to Rose since 2 1/2 years before the column was published.
Rose, an independent contractor for The Star, resigned shortly after the column was published.
“We are disappointed with Judge Gurney’s ruling. Rose has over 50 years of experience as a journalist. He knew better,” Denning said in a statement issued Tuesday.
“He misled readers in every aspect of his article,” Denning said. “The purposeful implication of a recent meeting, the use of falsified quotes, and the misattribution of comments was reckless for someone with five decades of experience.”
Rose’s lawyer, Eric Weslander, argued in court that the column reflected the senator’s views on Medicaid expansion even if he was paraphrased in the column.
Weslander contended that while Denning may not have used the precise words written in the column, they still reflected the senator’s overall political view on the issue.
He argued the senator only denied making the exact statements in the column without explaining how his views on Medicaid differed from the column.
Weslander said there was nothing defamatory about the column, comparing it to statements someone might make about a mouse liking cheese or a rabbit liking carrots.
He also said there was no evidence showing that Rose had any malice toward Denning, another key component in making the defamation case against the columnist.
Denning’s lawyer, Mike Kuckelman, said the attribution in the column was from a conversation that simply did not happen.
He pointed to Rose’s misgivings about the column soon after it was published when he was confronted about its veracity.
At that point, Rose asked Denning’s chief of staff to drop the issue if he gave up his column in The Kansas City Star.
“That is evidence that Mr. Rose knew those comments were false,” Kuckelman said. “This isn’t a minor misaccuracy or hyperbole. This is serious.”
Kuckelman pointed to The Kansas City Star’s issues with the column after it was published.
The column’s editor, Colleen McCain Nelson, called the column “misleading,” saying it gave the incorrect impression that Rose had interviewed Denning recently.
She also questioned the tactic of relying on an old interview as the basis for a column without going back to Denning to see if anything had changed.
Weslander argued that newspaper practices are separate from the law, a point the judge agreed with.
He also argued that Rose’s offer to give up his column at the newspaper was an attempt to settle the emerging controversy.
“Who wouldn’t want to avoid this?” Weslander said.
After the hearing, Kuckelman, chairman of the Kansas Republican Party, said he was disappointed with the decision.
“We’re strong believers in the First Amendment, too,” Kuckelman said. “There has to be a limit to what someone can say.”
