BELFAST — The civil suit against the Belfast Eight has finally reached its conclusion, more than two years after the defamation suit was filed in May 2021. 

In the end, Justice Robert Murray granted plaintiffs’ — R.M. Woodford and her daughter April Walker — second request to voluntarily dismiss the case; however, the dismissal is with prejudice with an award of costs to the defendants. 

When a court dismisses an action, it can either do so “with prejudice” or “without prejudice.” Dismissal with prejudice means that the plaintiff cannot refile the same claim again in that court,” according to Cornell Law School.

Following the Sept. 6 denial of  their first Motion to Dismiss without prejudice,  Woodford and Walker submitted a renewed Motion to Dismiss Sept. 28, this time with prejudice. 

The dispute began when Woodford and Walker filed a civil suit against eight members of the Belfast community, including two sitting Belfast City Councilors.

The suit alleged that the eight defendants spread rumors about the two women, including a rumor that the house they own, the historic James P. Whitehouse, was being used as a brothel.

The comments were alleged to have been made on social media, though the only evidence given was what appeared to be two screenshots of a rectangular box containing libelous assertions. They lacked any branding or the typical appearance of a post though, and the defense had maintained since the filing of the suit that they had never made the statements for which they had been accused. 

The two women became more known in the downtown area when they objected to the City's desire to rezone the area to allow for more housing. It was around that time that Woodford and Walker alleged the harassment began. 

Woodford and Walker drew the attention of the City and its citizens again when they decided to close a decades-old crosswalk, part of which crossed a small path at the end of the residence’s yard. That had allowed safe passage from Church Street to High Street for decades. When Woodford and Walker decided to discontinue the voluntary use of their land, there were posts on social media where some voiced their displeasure with the decision.

The City had to come up with a new plan for the crossing, which included adding a sidewalk that went around the now-fenced corner, to allow a place for walkers to wait until the path is clear. 

The two sides had argued in legal documents about whether or not the plaintiffs had the right to decide to dismiss the case, with lawyers for the respective individuals offering arguments and mentions of other similar cases, and their outcomes. 

Justice Murray listened to the group, and heard testimony from a woman whose parents live near Woodford and Walker, who testified that when she encountered Woodford she seemed in good spirits and fine physically just a few weeks prior to the trial. The plaintiffs had given recent medical issues and the associated costs as part of the reason they were moving for dismissal. 

During cross examination the woman was asked whether she was a medical doctor, or someone allowed to make diagnoses, both of which were answered in the negative. 

Attorney Seth T. Russell would later reassert that Woodford, Walker, and family were having medical issues, including strokes, and Walker’s husband has cancer. 

While the eight defendants sat together with their lawyers, a lone lawyer representing Woodford and Walker sat at the plaintiffs’ table. According to Russell, since the hearing was about whether the court had the legal ability to allow the case to be dropped, the two women were not going to attend. 

During his statements to the court regarding the defendants, McLean stated the eight defendants had their lives turned upside down since the original May 2021 filing of the suit. All of those accused are active members of the Belfast community; community leadership roles, active in politics. McLean stated that when the civil suit was filed it came with an explosion of coverage, further impacting the eight defendants’ lives. 

McLean told the court that the defense had tried to get the case dismissed early on in its journey through the legal process. The plaintiffs had opposed that motion based on the alleged evidence, something McLean claims never existed. That they were never posted on any type of social media. 

“The law doesn’t just protect plaintiff’s, it does the defense, too,” McLean told Justice Murray, who sat listening attentively. 

In the end, Justice Murray ruled that while the plaintiffs do have a right to have the case dismissed, the dismissal will be with prejudice and Woodford and Walker are liable for the legal costs associated with the defense. 

Attorney Chris MacLean said he does think the dismissal with prejudice with an award of costs is a “favorable outcome” necessary to trigger liability for the next lawsuit.”

According to Cornell Law School “In the civil context, court costs are normally awarded to the prevailing party, meaning that the ‘losing’ party must cover them.”

Erica Thoms can be reached at news@penbaypilot.com