Samantha Markle’s defamation case against Meghan was ‘dismissed with prejudice’

Almost a year ago exactly, Samantha Grant Markle’s defamation lawsuit against her half-sister, the Duchess of Sussex, was laughed out of court. That was Samantha arguing that Meghan “defamed” her in Finding Freedom, a book which Meghan did not write or edit. Within weeks of the case dismissal, Samantha refiled and the case has been making its dumb way through the Florida court system. Last fall, the judge even set a trial date. Samantha’s lawyer promised to depose Meghan and question her about the royal racists, something which has nothing to do with Samantha. Obviously, Samantha’s second dumbf–k lawsuit has now failed.

Meghan Markle has obtained a court victory in a defamation case brought forward by her half- sister Samantha Markle. U.S. District Attorney Judge Charlene Honeywell has dismissed with prejudice the case — in which Samantha, 59, claimed Meghan, 42, defamed her in multiple interviews, including her CBS interview with Oprah Winfrey — in court documents filed Tuesday and obtained by PEOPLE.

The Florida judge said in the filing that the motion to dismiss the case was granted after Samantha failed to produce statements that supported her defamation claim. In the filing, Honeywell wrote that the allegations “suggest” that Samantha “disagrees” with Meghan’s “opinions rather than statements of fact.”

In a statement obtained by PEOPLE, Meghan’s attorney, Michael J Kump, said: “We are pleased with the court’s ruling dismissing the case.”

Samantha, who is half-sister to Meghan through their father Thomas Markle, will not be able to refile the lawsuit since it was dismissed with prejudice. The author had been seeking $75,000 from the Duchess of Sussex for defamation.

Honeywell previously ruled in March, 2023 that Samantha would not be able to sue the Duchess of Sussex for defamation over claims made in Meghan’s unauthorized biography Finding Freedom and during her interview with Winfrey.

[From People]

The fact that Samantha is a delusional nutjob who will do anything for pennies and scraps of attention doesn’t interest me. What does interest me is finding out who funded Samantha’s efforts, just as I’d like to learn who has funded and scripted Thomas Markle’s slimy adventures. I have my theories that a well-known British media figure is largely behind both Samantha and Thomas’s scripts and this quixotic attempt to drag Meghan into court for the crime of “giving interviews.” It’s a shame there isn’t more of an effort to uncover all of the sh-t that’s happened behind-the-scenes with who has financed what and on whose orders. Like, I still believe that the Heritage Foundation’s attempts to get Prince Harry deported is something which has been organized at a very high level of British institutional power, whether it’s the Tory government or Buckingham Palace.

Photos courtesy of Cover Images, Backgrid, WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

60 Responses to “Samantha Markle’s defamation case against Meghan was ‘dismissed with prejudice’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Shiera_S says:

    So happy, Meghan keeps winning!
    I’m not from the US. Does anyone know what “with prejudice” means in that case please ? 😊

    • Allyn says:

      “With prejudice” means the lawsuit can’t be refiled.

    • Evie says:

      I believe that means she cannot file suit again for this claim. So glad that ding-dong was finally shown the courtroom door!! That whole side of Meghan’s family is useless.

    • Jay says:

      My understanding is that it means the decision is final – Samantha won’t be able to refile this case.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        Samantha can appeal though, through a higher court (11th Circuit Court of Appeals for those who care), which she has gone on record as saying this is something she intends to do.

        This is where the schadenfreude comes in: her lawyer, Human Garden Gnome Peter Ticktin, has to prove Judge Honeywell was biased or made an error in the law (he has to prove that Honeywell made an error in the application of the law). Petey isn’t the sharpest butterknife in the drawer, so that’ll be fun to watch just on its face.

        Also: Because she lost her case, the stakes for Samantha just went up. Florida has an Anti-SLAPP statute. Kaiser wants the tea, we all want the tea, on who is funding Sammy’s lawsuits. Well under the Anti-SLAPP laws, if Meghan files an Anti-SLAPP lawsuit and succeeds with it in court, Samantha would not only be required to pay Meghan’s legal fees, she would be ordered to identify the SOURCE of the funds!

        From the Judge’s order:
        “This order makes no ruling on attorney’s fees under Florida’s Anti-SLAPP statute, which Defendant indicates she will move for upon dismissal.”

        Defendant = Meghan here. She has indicated to the court through her lawyer that they intend to file an Anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Samantha. Again, the Sussexes are out here playing chess. People keep coming for them, and they keep getting these haters’ nasty dealings on. the. record. Harry did it with the Mirror case, with the Ravec case, and Meghan’s doing it here. They want to know who’s bankrolling this abuse of them through the courts, they’re getting the names behind the f-ckery on record.

        Let us also not forget: Peter Ticktin was recently sanctioned for his “frivolous” Trump lawsuit. I’d lay odds this case will end up with him sanctioned again. It’s almost a compulsion with him at this point.

        I would dearly love to see Harry do this to Heritage Foundation as well in re: the DHS case, tbh. I want to know what US dark money, and who on Salty Island, is funding that mess. Unfortunately Heritage Foundation’s case is being handled by the Federal District Court in DC. DC has an anti-SLAPP statute, but it’s, for lack of a better word, a local ordinance? Federal and State/county court systems are very different lanes that do not cross over, generally speaking.

        Rep. Jamie Raskin (MD-08) introduced a bill for a Federal Anti-SLAPP law in September 2022. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8864 Last notes indicate it’s languishing/died in committee. It has never been brought to a House vote.

    • Carmen says:

      It means Samantha will not be able to re-file her lawsuit, claiming new evidence, or whatever. The door is shut. The case is closed, period.

      If a case is dismissed without prejudice, the lawyers can have the case reopened, in the event new evidence comes to light.

    • MsIam says:

      Samantha can’t bring that case again it’s permanently dismissed.

    • Eurydice says:

      It means the judge’s decision is final and the case can’t be retried. This can happen for various reasons, but I imagine here it was because Samantha had no evidence and her case was a waste of time.

    • Becks1 says:

      Like others have said, it means she can’t refile. She can appeal it, however, but the appeals process is stricter and narrower than a lot of people realize so I doubt it will go anywhere.

      • HeatherC says:

        She can’t appeal the case, just the ruling, which she plans on doing, She and her lawyer think they can prove the judge was biased against her and was under some undue influence I guess. She tried that before, when she tried to make the judge recuse herself because she was appointed by Pres Obama, who she never met.

      • Beenie says:

        @HEATHERC

        “when she tried to make the judge recuse herself because she was appointed by Pres Obama, who she never met”

        ….. I’m sorry what???

      • pottymouth pup says:

        @Beenie Markle tried to have the judge removed from the case because the judge was an Obama appointee and, in Scamantha’s opinion, therefor had too close a relationship with Obama to be impartial. The judge has never met Obama

      • Beenie says:

        @POTTYMOUTH PUP

        I think I’m missing the connection to Obama though. This was a lawsuit against Megan, right?

        Are you guys saying that Samantha Markle and her lawyers tried to get a judge removed from a case because that judge was appointed by President Obama and President Obama… somehow had an influence on legal cases in favour of Megan? This is too crazy to be true.

        I need to know who Samantha’s lawyers are because either they are certifiably nuts or they are racking up their billable hours as much as possible until the gravy train runs out.

      • Eurydice says:

        @Beanie – one of Samantha’s lawyers is Peter Tiktin. He was a classmate of Donald Trump back in military school and he wrote a book about Trump. He is/was also involved in Trump’s defense for whatever indictments against him in Florida. He’s also had his license suspended a couple of times. There’s no way Samantha can afford him and her asking damages of $75,000 wouldn’t be enough to tempt him, so someone else must be paying him.

      • HeatherC says:

        Hi Beenie! Not sure if you’re American, but our federal judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by congress. So Honeywell was appointed to her bench during the Obama administration. She stated she never met him and that is believable, it would have been based on review of performance, background check, etc. Hundreds of judges are appointed by the administrations yearly. Samantha and her Trump lawyer figured because she’s black and all black people know each other right? So Meghan knows her too and was able to bribe her. (PLEASE read the last two sentences sarcastically)

      • bisynaptic says:

        Re: Obama recusal. It sounds as if the entities propelling this lawsuit are operating on the reactionary/ Trumpist/ GOP assumption that Democratic governments/appointments are illegitimate.

  2. Seraphina says:

    First, she reminds me of a SNL character in that pic. Second, I read more about the lawsuit last night and was like, how the hell did this even go to court, because it sounded asinine to begin with and lastly, YES – who is funding her? THAT is the real story because litigation is not cheap.

    • Melly says:

      Samatha really has the face of an SNL megaKaren

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      We have smarter people here who may be able to explain this but for now…I’m pretty sure this was allowed to proceed for two reasons: to allow due process and fairness (especially since Meghan is world famous vs Samantha who is…not) AND to allow the judge the option of dismissing the case permanently.

    • Berkeleyfarm says:

      I don’t know what the anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) rules are like in the jurisdiction she filed in. Anti-SLAPP laws do provide some protection to people targeted as revenge for hurt feelings/something they said that was obviously opinion because the case can be dealt with with in a more expeditious way and some states have “recovery” provisions in their laws. Otherwise recovering your expenses after a frivolous suit is time consuming, expensive, and not often successful.

      Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, I do however follow attorneys who like dissecting cases like this.

      The summary correctly pointed out that Sammy had such hurt feelz that she sued Meghan for what Omid Scobie wrote in FF. Ya … can’t do that. If Sammy didn’t like what Omid said she could try going at him/his publishers. Refiling the case (which was apparently dismissed without prejudice e.g. “you can try refiling”) didn’t fix the main issue, that Samantha didn’t have a legal case.

      This process was involved and racked up the hours so the question of “who is funding this” is a legit one that I would love to see answered.

      • Where'sMyTiara says:

        Meghan has indicated to the court in FL through her lawyer that she intends to file an Anti-SLAPP lawsuit against Samantha. Under the statute if Meghan wins her suit, Samantha has to pay Meghan’s legal fees and also disclose the source of those fees.

  3. Dee(2) says:

    So let’s see this year Meghan has relaunched her podcast, Given a well received speech at SXSW, sponsored a study on women’s portrayal in the media by the Geena Davis Institute, and won her case with prejudice. Harry won his case against the mirror, ” lost” his case against Ravec getting his security fight on the record and had the NYPD verify their events of the car chase and give them more protection. Had a fantastic opening at Invictus one year to go and presented to a very warm welcome at the NFL Awards.  They both had continued with outstanding philanthropic works getting gushing thanks from those impacted. And on the other side of the Atlantic…… Karma was a little slow for my liking but it’s coming in hard to make up in 2024

    • Couch Potato says:

      This is the kind of listing (and news) I like to read on a cloudy morning:-)

    • Where'sMyTiara says:

      And they also got to hang out with Jamaican prime minister, and Bob Marley’s family (who refused to meet with Huevos Rageros & Wonder Wiglet)

  4. Jais says:

    So I think Meghan can recoup her lawyer fees from Samantha and if she doesn’t have it, will her mysterious funder pay it and will we be able to then see the money trail? I’m asking for this as my “easter gift.” Bc you know that’s really a thing🙄

    • Chloe says:

      You know i have been wondering this as well. Does scammy now have to pay meghan’s legal fees? Because if so she might as well claim bankruptcy right now.

    • The Hench says:

      @Jais – props for the “Easter gift” reference. Lol.

      • Jais says:

        Easter is around the corner🐣… and so are the Ides of March…those who have demanded Easter gifts in the past should beware…

      • Shawna says:

        @Jais, you are not pulling your punches today! ROFL.

    • Jules57 says:

      I was wondering if she had to prove she could pay before going forward? Otherwise Meghan is out of pocket. Isn’t scammy broke?

      • Debbie says:

        One may be “broke” but still have access to those who are motivated and not broke. How else would that scum (or so I heard) called Scamantha be able to keep filing these frivolous lawsuits all these years?

    • AMB says:

      @Jais – yeah, but pursing that would just serve to keep Scammy in the news which is the whole point of this. The only way to make her go away is to not engage, which has pretty much been The Montecito Way.

  5. Tessa says:

    I hope whoever bank rolled Samantha suits is found out. Someone obviously put up money for her trip to the UK where she waited outside the Sussex home obviously uninvited.

  6. Amy T says:

    What is wrong with these people? Do they think if they keep re-filing and appealing (evidently Samantha’s intention, per her attorney), things will turn out differently? Whoever is paying her legal bills must be really desperate to pull focus from the royal clown show.

    • The Hench says:

      The whole point is to generate headlines. That is the endgame. I suspect whoever is backing her will appeal – not because they think they have any hope of winning but because it gives them something else to keep screeching about.

      • Berkeleyfarm says:

        Generate headlines, “fan service”, and harass the target because they have to spend time and money defending.

  7. aquarius64 says:

    Scammy was on SM claiming they are appealing, but the target is now the judge. The appeal would be based on error in interpretation of the law but Scammy plans to go for judicial misconduct. Scam is claiming corruption, undue influence, etc. and the court wouldn’t allow in evidence. In a US defamation case the plaintiff (Scam) has the burden of proof. She didn’t have the receipts to back up her ridiculous claims and she had almost 2 years to bring it. In that 58 page decision one thing that stood out was Scam couldn’t prove Bad Dad primarily raised Meghan. That’s a talking point the BM used which has been debunked. The BM now has more egg on its face for not vetting Scammy. Meghan now has 30 days to file for Scam to pay her legal fees. She can’t cry poverty if she can appeal.

    • Tessa says:

      She appeals to the derangers. She needs to move on. She is lucky she was not sued by the sussexes afer the so called book she wrote

    • equality says:

      Going after a judge with no proof. Yeah, that sounds like a good idea.

    • JP says:

      Oof…going after the judge will end even worse for her than the cases against Meghan. She should do it.

    • HeatherC says:

      OFC she wasn’t allowed to show evidence. Her case was so meritless she didn’t even make it to trial…where evidence is shown!

      Honeywell was frustratingly slow about ruling on the dismissal but her ruling was meticulous. I’m not a lawyer but I don’t think Samantha has a chance.

      • Berkeleyfarm says:

        That’s right, if you don’t have a legal case, you don’t get your freebie PR “evidentiary hearing”. Ya gotta have enough receipts in the filing to get it through to the next level.

  8. Amy Bee says:

    I’m glad Meghan won. As for who is paying for Scammy’s lawyer it’s definitely the British press.

  9. sevenblue says:

    I hope Meghan can get every penny of the legal fees on this case. Her evil half-sister may be broke, but people who are bankrolling her lawsuits are not.

    • ML says:

      Same, SevenBlue. It’s infuriating that this even made it to court in the first place: it’s clearly Scammy abusing her half sister and, yes, I hope that Scammy’s rich enablers will be revealed. And punished.

  10. WiththeAmerican says:

    What Meghan said about not growing up with Samantha was not a lie, it was her experience. Her opinion of her experience, which does not reasonably qualify for defamation. Obviously an empty harassment suit, how it even got this far in Florida given Florida’s anti-SLAPP provisions, I don’t really understand.

    She might not want to feed this beast by going for for legal fees, but then again Samantha/Heritage/Royal Family isn’t going to back down until they’re put down legally.

    As I’ve said before here, Heritage UK connections is most likely behind this, at behest of the royal family itself and British media. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if PW himself were pushing this just to get dirt to throw at Harry to deflect from his lies.

  11. Chantal1 says:

    Boss Attorney Bri (brave woman) covered this decision in detail last night on her YouTube channel (Bri lost subscribers and the haters left awful comments the last time she fairly covered this case).
    The judge rebuked most of what Scam alleged based on the actual transcripts and shaded the hell out of Scam’s attorney in it as well. Hope that atty got paid a lot of money bc that court decision was embarrassing to read. They couldn’t prove anything despite being given several chances to amend the filing. One of my faves was Scam saying she had seen Meghan more recently than Meghan said but couldn’t say exactly when (I’m guessing by “recently” she meant she saw her on reruns of Suits). My other fave was Scam claiming that Meg and Chris Bouzy were specifically talking about her when they were referring to the hate accounts being run by middle aged white women, despite Meghan never mentioning her or anyone else by name. All of which made Bri wonder if Scam was actually admitting that those hate accounts were hers. 😂

    Congrats Meghan! It also sounds like Meg may also try to recoup her attorney fees!

  12. Nanea says:

    This was meant as a reply to @Chantal1 above, but somehow ended up as a new comment.
    —————
    Didn’t Chris Bouzy find out that Scammy had at least 17 (?) accounts on Twitter?

    Or was that a tally of all of her socials, including Insta and YouTube?

    I don’t remember – but then I barely manage to keep up with my presence on Xwitter, Insta, Spoutible, Bluesky.

  13. Schrodinger's Kate says:

    What wonderful news! Now let’s all see if we can find a can of Raid big enough to spray at that roach of a “sister” to send her scurrying back to the shadows where she belongs.

    Though to my eternal amazement, she did put at least one beautiful thing out into the world that I know of, and that’s her daughter who is friends with Meghan. (And I hope her other children are good people as well). It’s a shame she isn’t a decent person in her own right, but I fear she got the worst of nature and nurture from her father.

  14. lanne says:

    I said this yesterday but shitty sister and treasonous dad should turn on their paylords. I know someone posted that dad likely had to sign an NDA, but either brother or sister (brother would do it if he had a brain cell–he’s made a mess of things with his open letter to Harry but he’s also on record saying nice things about his sister) should speak up about who paid them to throw their shit and foul the family nest. Brother can say he was used by the palace, the media, etc. He can name names, make some money for himself. Now’s the time to do it. Surely these cockroaches have no loyalty to the royals, who used them and cast them out–surely that wounded their misbegotten pride, right?

  15. Just Jade says:

    The BM rats who were behind Samantha’s lawsuit mess can go scratch.

  16. Lady Digby says:

    https://deadline.com/2024/03/meghan-markle-sister-defamation-case-1235856351/
    There a link in the Deadline article that takes you to the Judge’s report on her determination which makes it clear that it was NOT defamatory of Meghan to express her own opinion about her experiences growing up. I would love to have read half sibling’s justification for the claim that they were close until Meg met Harry. Meg attended Scammy’s graduation in 2008 at the request of their father. They were never close due to huge age gap, Scammy marrying young and having 2 kids of her own. She was jealous and resentful of Meg from the beginning so that stymied any chance of a relationship apart from the age gap. Scammy claims that they regularly phoned each other but that didn’t happen but she does admit that the last time she phoned Meg in 2017 that her half sister put the phone down on her. Scammy is trying to make fetch happen here. They were never close due to Scammy’ s resentment and hostility. As Meg eloquently put in THAT letter to dad, “your other daughter whom I barely know”! She is a horrible woman who has regularly trashed Meg via paid interviews for years. Why wouldnt Meg want nothing to do with someone so toxic? Fed up with her and grifter Dad being platformed anywhere to continue harassing a long estranged relative.

  17. QuiteContrary says:

    This is great news. What a loon this woman is!

  18. blunt talker says:

    God don’t like ugly-Meghan’s half-sister is truly ugly on the outside and ugly on the inside-annoying and pestering her baby half-sister because she has a heart and mind full of hate-I know a huge age difference can cause distances in family relationships-my baby brother has that problem because his siblings are much older than he has trouble relating to us constantly-the world he lives in is totally different than the ones we live in-we all try to be understanding where we can-Scammy trying to force herself on Meg and her family is disgusting and evil-at her age she needs to be trying to get right with her own children and grandkids-Meghan is not tryi ng to force a relationship or interfere with the Markle side-Leave Meghan alone.