Cha vs. Flamm: The endless lawsuit

In yet another twist in an ongoing linkurl:legal battle,;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54035/ a Los Angeles Superior Court judge yesterday (Jan. 24) reinstated a linkurl:defamation lawsuit;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53709/ filed by Kwang Yul Cha, a fertility researcher who published a controversial 2001 linkurl:study;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11584476&dopt=AbstractPlus linking in vitro fertilization success to prayer. The

Bob Grant
Bob Grant

Bob Grant is Editor in Chief of The Scientist, where he started in 2007 as a Staff Writer.

View full profile.


Learn about our editorial policies.

Jan 24, 2008
In yet another twist in an ongoing linkurl:legal battle,;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/54035/ a Los Angeles Superior Court judge yesterday (Jan. 24) reinstated a linkurl:defamation lawsuit;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53709/ filed by Kwang Yul Cha, a fertility researcher who published a controversial 2001 linkurl:study;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11584476&dopt=AbstractPlus linking in vitro fertilization success to prayer. The judge reversed his decision to linkurl:throw out the case;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/53876/ last November in response to a motion filed by University of California, Irvine professor Bruce Flamm, who has openly linkurl:criticized;http://www.obgynnews.com/article/PIIS0029743707702021/fulltext Cha's study since its publication. "The legal nightmare will now continue," Flamm wrote in an Email to __The Scientist__. Cha's privately owned healthcare group, CHA Health Systems, announced the judge's decision in a press release yesterday. "We're very pleased that the Court has reinstated Dr. Cha's claim," said Dr. Cha's attorney, Anthony Glassman, in the release. "We have always believed that the article was reasonably susceptible to a defamatory interpretation, and we look forward to letting a...
(Jan. 24) reinstated a linkurl:defamation lawsuit;http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/53709/ filed by Kwang Yul Cha, a fertility researcher who published a controversial 2001 linkurl:study;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11584476&dopt=AbstractPlus linking in vitro fertilization success to prayer. The judge reversed his decision to linkurl:throw out the case;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/53876/ last November in response to a motion filed by University of California, Irvine professor Bruce Flamm, who has openly linkurl:criticized;http://www.obgynnews.com/article/PIIS0029743707702021/fulltext Cha's study since its publication. "The legal nightmare will now continue," Flamm wrote in an Email to __The Scientist__. Cha's privately owned healthcare group, CHA Health Systems, announced the judge's decision in a press release yesterday. "We're very pleased that the Court has reinstated Dr. Cha's claim," said Dr. Cha's attorney, Anthony Glassman, in the release. "We have always believed that the article was reasonably susceptible to a defamatory interpretation, and we look forward to letting a jury make that determination." Flamm, however, maintained that the lawsuit extends beyond the opinion piece at the root of Cha's lawsuit. "I am certain that this lawsuit is not really about defamation or the precise wording of one sentence in a brief opinion article," Flamm wrote. Instead, Flamm insisted, Cha's suit seeks to silence his criticism of Cha's "physic-defying 'miracle' study."

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?