In light of a recent ruling in the U.S. District Court for the District Court of Massachusetts, legal leaders and communications teams are being urged to exercise caution when publicly addressing pending claims. The precedent-setting case in question – City of Fort Lauderdale Police and Firefighters’ Retirement System v. Pegasystems – highlights how routine disavowals of a lawsuit’s merits can potentially serve as grounds for further misconduct allegations, especially if the statements can be construed as false or misleading.
The case versus software company Pegasystems posits that even a boilerplate denial could be used to level an accusation of a fraudulent or deceptive statement. This, therefore, underscores the import of discretion when engaging in communication concerning ongoing litigation. Experts suggest this ruling may reshape the way companies approach their public statements on impending lawsuits, as carelessly dismissing the merits of a claim can unintentionally open the door to additional legal liabilities.
Advisedly, this development calls for a more guarded and well-considered communications strategy when navigating sensitive public litigations. And while statements that downplay or reject the merits of a claim may seem standard practice, organizations ought to be judicious and ensure their messages do not inadvertently serve as catalysts for even more litigation woes.