In a case centered around campaign speech, Dinsmore litigators Sarah Reddick and Kenyon Meyer successfully defended their client in a political lawsuit filed during the 2024 primary election in Kentucky.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The candidate received an endorsement from a Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) chapter in March 2024. She promoted this endorsement in her campaign materials, truthfully stating she was the only candidate with FOP support. Her political opponent later obtained a competing FOP endorsement and then sent a cease and desist letter demanding that the candidate remove or change her campaign signs and materials.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Dinsmore team pushed back, refusing to make the change and citing their client\u2019s free speech rights in a political campaign. The opponent filed a lawsuit asking the Court to order the candidate to change her campaign signs. Sarah and Kenyon argued the opponent sought an unconstitutional prior restraint against campaign speech, which enjoys the highest protections our Constitution offers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Dinsmore filed a response opposing the motion for a restraining order and a motion to dismiss the case under Kentucky\u2019s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA)\u2014a law that protects people from being sued for exercising their free speech rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
After a hearing where four witnesses testified, the judge agreed with the candidate that the First Amendment protected her campaign signs and prohibited a court from ordering her to change them. The judge then encouraged the candidate\u2019s opponent dismiss the case with prejudice to avoid being ordered to pay the candidate\u2019s legal fees under UPEPA. The opponent agreed and dropped the case, but Dinsmore\u2019s team objected to the dismissal because it didn\u2019t acknowledge their client\u2019s right to recover attorneys\u2019 fees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sarah and Kenyon filed an appeal, focusing solely on that issue. The Kentucky Court of Appeals agreed with them in a published opinion, ruling that the candidate was indeed entitled to have her legal fees covered. The case was sent back to determine the amount of those fees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The matter involving Dinsmore\u2019s client is only the second published opinion from the Court of Appeals of Kentucky interpreting Kentucky\u2019s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
In a case centered around campaign speech, Dinsmore litigators Sarah Reddick and Kenyon Meyer successfully defended their client in a political lawsuit filed during the 2024 primary election in Kentucky. The candidate received an endorsement from a Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) chapter in March 2024. She promoted this endorsement in her campaign materials, truthfully\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-57060","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n