Montgomery, Alabama — The Alabama Supreme Court has reinstated a legal dispute involving a lawyer who claims he was wrongfully terminated due to a manipulated social media post. The court’s ruling overturned a lower court’s decision that had dismissed the suit brought by attorney Daniel Flickinger against his peer, Lawrence Tracy King.
In a 5-4 vote, the justices decided to send the case back to Jefferson County Circuit Court for further examination. The decision does not resolve the merits of Flickinger’s claim of “tortious interference with a business relationship”; instead, it emphasizes that pertinent factual questions should be determined by a jury.
The court’s majority, led by Associate Justice Chris McCool, noted that Flickinger had raised legitimate questions of fact regarding his dismissal following a controversial Facebook post he made in June 2020. Flickinger’s post engaged with the circumstances surrounding George Floyd’s death, a situation that sent shockwaves through the nation.
Floyd, an African American man, died during an arrest in Minneapolis when former officer Derek Chauvin knelt on his neck for over nine minutes. The highly publicized incident triggered widespread protests and discussions about race and police brutality, including demonstrations in several cities across Alabama.
The court highlighted the role of King, who sent Flickinger’s partners a text containing an altered screenshot of Flickinger’s original post. This altered image, which falsely presented Flickinger’s professional credentials, led to Flickinger’s termination from Wainwright, Pope & McMeekin, where he had been employed for 11 years.
While the lower court had found that the decision to fire Flickinger was independently made by his firm’s partners based on their assessment of his social media activity, the Supreme Court noted that the review of Flickinger’s posts took place only after King shared the misleading screenshot. The immediate aftermath saw Flickinger urged to resign the following day.
The justices opined that it remains unclear whether Kings’ actions constituted “tortious interference” that directly led to Flickinger’s dismissal. King has argued that his text was justified because it conveyed a true statement—Flickinger had indeed made a post about Floyd. However, the nature of the altered image complicates the question of truthfulness, which the court asserted must be resolved by a jury.
Flickinger expressed his views on the ruling, emphasizing its significance in a politically charged environment. He asserted that the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision encourages open dialogue regarding contentious issues and emphasizes the need for honesty when critiquing personal opinions that connect to public discussions.
He remarked that this ruling provides a pathway for individuals to seek redress when personal views are unfairly misrepresented in a professional context. “If you disagree with someone’s opinion, it might be better to engage them directly rather than resorting to deceitful tactics,” he stated.
Efforts to contact King for further comment were unsuccessful as of the ruling. The court’s opinion was supported by Chief Justice Sarah Stewart and Associate Justices Kelli Wise, Will Sellers, and Bill Lewis.
This article was automatically written by OpenAI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested removed, retracted, or corrected by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.