"I'm subpoenaing you're (sic) idiot 'report' and possibly suing you for defamation," Murrey wrote in response, according to screenshots produced for the anti-SLAPP motion.

"By the way, real decent women love me lol," Murrey added.

More than 50 women wrote about him in the private Facebook group and were labeled co-conspirators in a "large-scale conspiracy to create a fake online social consensus," according to Murrey's lawsuit.

Keosian dismissed all claims against Valdes during a hearing Monday on her anti-SLAPP motion and found no evidence of a conspiracy. Legal experts say it's likely the other named parties in the lawsuit will have similar success.

Valdes' posts "involved a matter of public interest: women's security against male violence and harassment," Keosian wrote in his ruling. In one message posted to the Facebook group, Valdes wrote, "I'm so glad we're protecting each other."

"Just feels really good to be dismissed from all counts — it wasn't just the two counts of defamation, but all 11 counts he filed against me," Valdes told KTLA after the hearing.

Murrey posted his response to Monday's ruling on a blockchain social media platform and on his personal website. He claimed he did not know Valdes aside from their one interaction on the Hinge app and called her a cyberbully who shared his personal information online.

"This behavior should not be normalized and I am challenging every person in their various roles," Murrey said, promising to pursue his legal case.

This is not the first time Murrey has taken legal action to accuse a woman of causing him emotional distress. In 2019, he sued a woman he met on Tinder, making similar claims of defamation.

Murrey represented himself in his latest lawsuit. Several other named defendants have upcoming anti-SLAPP hearings in the case, and Murrey will have an opportunity to appeal the court's recent ruling.

Malpractice attorney Frances O'Meara, who is not affiliated with Murrey's lawsuit, said that in an anti-SLAPP motion, the court must first consider if a person is being sued while exercising their right to free speech. If so, then the burden shifts back to the person filing the lawsuit, and the question becomes whether the claim has minimal merit to proceed.

California was the first state to pass an anti-SLAPP law, in 1992, to target lawsuits that abuse the judicial system.

"The statute then expanded to situations of people suing just to shut other people down when they certainly have a right to speak," O'Meara said.

Anytime people say something on the internet, they put themselves at risk of being sued, said attorney Jeffrey Lewis, who is not affiliated with the Murrey case.

In order to succeed in his defamation lawsuit, Murrey would have had to prove that the statements made about him were false and that he suffered damages, Lewis said.

"Defamation lawsuits are really hard, unlike going to small claims over a breach-of-contract case, or somebody owes you money," Lewis said. "People get sued all the time for saying things on Facebook, but a group of women posting about a dating experience with one guy, and the one guy deciding to respond with a lawsuit? It's very unusual."

_____

©2024 Los Angeles Times. Visit latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.