Court Allows Defamation Claims Over Election-Fraud Analysis Dispute
A federal judge in Michigan ruled that defamation claims by forensic analysts against attorney Stephanie Lynn Lambert can proceed, while related breach-of-contract claims also survive.
In Apelbaum v. Lambert, the Eastern District of Michigan permitted defamation claims by cybersecurity firm XRVision and its owner Yaacov Apelbaum against attorney Stephanie Lynn Lambert, her office, and Bill Bachenberg. The plaintiffs had been hired to conduct forensic reviews of election systems in Michigan and Pennsylvania, including a $200,000 analysis of Fulton County, later expanded for an additional $350,000. After finding no evidence of fraud in June 2022, the defendants allegedly stopped payment and began a defamation campaign, accusing the analysts of conflicts of interest, incompetence, and secret federal ties.
The court concluded the statements were presented as factual assertions, not pure opinion, and could deter third parties from hiring the plaintiffs. Accordingly, the defamation claims were allowed to proceed, and the breach-of-contract claim was also left intact for further litigation.
Why it matters
The ruling lets a dispute over alleged false statements and unpaid election-fraud work proceed, highlighting legal risks in post-2020 election controversies.
In this story
