From Judge Steven Merryday's decision yesterday in Lindberg v. Weinberg (M.D. Fla.):
Alleging that a December 2, 2024 Bloomberg Businessweek article titled How A Billionaire's "Baby Project" Ensnared Dozens of Women contains three false and defamatory statements, Greg Lindberg sues Bloomberg, L.P., and three Bloomberg employees …. Lindberg moves for an "emergency preliminary injunction" to stop Bloomberg from publishing an allegedly defamatory podcast based on the article.
Bloomberg's article details Lindberg's "baby project," an effort to use egg donors and surrogates to enlarge Lindberg's family. The sub-title of the article states, "Disgraced tycoon Greg Lindberg built a network of egg donors and surrogates. Several say he conned them—and that the US fertility clinics helped him do it." To substantiate the information in the article, the defendants "reviewed independently sourced legal, medical and financial records, and conducted dozens of interviews with [Lindberg's] former employees, clinic workers, ex-girlfriends, egg donors and surrogates." …
Lindberg alleges in Count V [which seeks injunctive relief based on the allegedly defamatory statements] that three statements in the article are defamatory[:] (1) that "Lindberg's selection of egg donors was based exclusively on eye color," (2) that "the statement characterizing Lindberg's family planning decisions as 'off' and 'jarring,'" and (3) that "Lindberg 'conned' women into donating eggs to him." The general allegations of the complaint include only allegations of the "eye color" statement and the "family planning" statement.
