Libel Suit Against Author Kelley Allowed to Proceed

A high-powered Beverly Hills entertainment lawyer on Monday won permission to continue his lawsuit against celebrity biographer Kitty Kelley, who he claims libeled him when she thanked him for acting as a source for her unauthorized biography of Nancy Reagan.

In her controversial volume on the former First Lady, Kelley listed attorney Mickey Rudin as one of 612 sources--the people she said made “the most important contribution to this book.”

A federal judge in Los Angeles allowed Rudin’s unique suit--which has been dubbed a “libel by thank you” case--to proceed, although he dismissed some portions of it.

The suit was filed this year by Rudin, whose star-studded client roster has included Frank Sinatra, Cher and Liza Minnelli.

Rudin has charged that Kelley defamed him by inaccurately and maliciously listing him as a source for her Reagan book. The complaint alleges that he has been damaged “in excess of $50,000.”

Specifically, Rudin contends that Kelley gives the false impression that he revealed confidential information about Sinatra, whom he represented from 1955 to 1987. One of the most sensational charges in the book is the implication that the singer and Reagan were involved in a lengthy affair, including assignations during White House “lunches.”

Sinatra has denied that there was such a relationship. Reagan has made no direct comment. Rudin said he does not believe the two were romantically involved.

Rudin says he never talked to Kelley.

The case involves some fine points of libel law as well as a battle between two longtime foes. Eight years ago, as Sinatra’s lawyer, Rudin unsuccessfully sued to halt publication of Kelley’s highly unflattering biography of the singer.

U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson dismissed two of the five allegations in Rudin’s civil suit. He dismissed one charge involving a federal copyright statute and threw out Rudin’s claim that the mere mention of him as a source in Kelley’s book was libelous.

However, Wilson allowed Rudin to proceed with his claim that he was a victim of another kind of libel, one that considers a false statement libelous if it carries a negative implication beyond the actual words on the page.

The judge also tentatively ruled that Rudin is not a “general public figure.”

This means that Rudin could prevail by showing negligence, an easier standard to meet than that imposed on a public figure, who has to show that a false statement was published maliciously.

However, the judge said he was not stating definitively that Rudin will surmount all pretrial objections by attorneys for Kelley and her publisher, Simon & Schuster. Wilson said Rudin will eventually have to show that he suffered “special damages.”