dismissed with prejudice - internet forums

[yorkiepassion]

I and 26 other forum members/forum owners were sued by a crazy person that is an attorney because she had been banned from these forums, demanding reinstatement of her account or be sued in federal courts. She filed suit, 2 months later after receiving a letter from my attorney explaining we will be filing for sanctions against her for attorney misconduct, filing a frivilious lawsuit and legal fees, she dismissed the suit "with prejudice"
she is now on the internet posting that I was ill advised by my attorneys regarding the true definition of "dismissed with prejudice" and will be filing a new suit against me...
I called her states bar, they explained just by her posting this she can be held accountable and be sued for libel...before I decide what my options are can someone please explain to me the legal definition and if by her posting an untruth is that actionable??

thank you in advance

 

[mafioso]

DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE - When a case is dismissed for good reason and the plaintiff is barred from bringing an action on the same claim.

She has a first amendment right.............I have not seen enough from your post to hold her accountable for anything in her post. The law sometimes needs a whole lot to have a case with potential of success...........

 

[yorkiepassion]

her post

Apparently ** and ** were not so well advised by their legal representatives afterall.

After reading the lies that these two are continuing to post about me on ** I have reconsidered my decision to settle out of court with ** and am considering instituting a new action aginst **.

I was too soft and too nice the last time and they will only continue to do this to others if someone with authority, like a judge, doesn't tell them to stop it.

another post

She is smply lying and continuing this feud with her lies and misrepresentations of the facts and I have no problem with suing her and some of her new friends even again for her actions and their lies in support.

 

[mafioso]

Not enough...........She is exercising her freedom of speech and expression........even if it is online. You still don't have a case based on this. You watch politicians call the president a liar...........it is simply an opinion which you can't challenge under her fist amendment rights.

 

[SoCal_Lawyer]

And, just a hint, it would help if you didn't call her "crazy" on an internet forum. The dismissal with prejudice only applies to the previous claims. Any claims in the future against you are perfectly fine. This is probably what she was trying to get across to you by her posts.

 

[yorkiepassion]

CRAZY fits quite nicely as a descriptive, glad you mentioned it KT, if the shoe fits!

 

[RMST]

Not enough...........She is exercising her freedom of speech and expression........even if it is online. You still don't have a case based on this. You watch politicians call the president a liar...........it is simply an opinion which you can't challenge under her fist amendment rights.

When is it "enough"?
If this person is posting defamatory statements about others, when is it no longer freedom of speech and expression, but instead, harassment? I wonder when it becomes an ethics question as well.