1

October 16, 2014

Attn: Station Manager

Re: False Silver State Committee For Justice And Fairness Advertisement


Dear Station Manager:

This letter is submitted by the undersigned counsel on behalf of our client, Adam Laxalt
for Attorney General. It has come to our attention that the Silver State Committee For J ustice
And Fairness (Silver State CJ F) has purchased time on your station to air an advertisement that
contains false and defamatory statements about our client. As you know, your stations
obligation to serve the public interest requires you to decline to air false and misleading
advertising, and unlike an advertisement aired by a candidate, your station can be held liable for
distributing Silver State CJ Fs defamatory messages. Your station must cease and desist from
airing this advertisement.

The advertisement references and fundamentally fails to accurately describe confidential
internal documents prepared by an individual at Adam Laxalts previous employer, the law firm
of Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP (the Firm). The advertisement states, Laxalts firm called
him a train wreck and the advertisement goes on to claim, they [the Firm] concluded he
doesnt even have the basic skill set to be a lawyer. This statement about what the Firm itself
concluded is demonstrably false. These are mere excerpts taken from a single individual at the
Firm. The Firms opinion of Adam Laxalt could not be further from those falsely claimed in the
advertisement. The Firms public statements on this subject could not make this any more clear:

Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP is disappointed by the television ad that
recently ran regarding Adam Laxalt. Not only does the ad falsely describe
our firm's conclusions following Adams initial review, but it ignores Adams
performance in the period after that initial review. The firm also has
previously stated that the release of internal firm documents was not
authorized by the firm, making the ads use of unattributed notes in those
documents especially inappropriate. The firm stands by its previous
statement that Adam is a capable and talented attorney, who made excellent
contributions to our firm, and who served his clients well.

Statement of Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP (October 3, 2014) (attached).

It is plainly defamatory for Silver State CJ F to present excerpts of a single person and
portray them to your stations viewers as the conclusions of the Firm itself. The Firm
2

emphasized this point by flatly stating: Not only does the ad falsely describe our firm's
conclusions following Adams initial review, but it ignores Adams performance in the
period after that initial review. It is not only disingenuous of Silver State CJ F to portray these
statements as those of the Firm, it is defamatory to do so -- particularly in light the Firms clear
and public refutation.

Under federal law, your station is not obligated to air any advertisements from Silver
State CJ F. See Columbia Broadcasting Sys., Inc. v. Democratic Nat'l Comm., 412 U.S. 94, 113
(1973); Natl Conservative Political Action Comm., 89 F.C.C. 2d 626 (F.C.C. 1982). These
precedents hold that third-party spenders, such as Silver State CJ F, do not have a guaranteed
right of access to air their advertisements on your station. In fact, if your station does not stop
airing this advertisement after gaining knowledge that it contains false and misleading
statements, you are subjecting your station to potential liability. Because you need not air this
advertisement, your station is not protected from legal liability for its content when you do grant
access to your facilities. See 47 U.S.C. 315; Columbia Broadcasting Sys., 412 U.S. at 113
n.12; Farmers Educ. & Coop. Union v. WDAY, 360 U.S. 525, 535 (1959); Felix v. Westinghouse
Radio Stations, 186 F.2d 1, 6 (3rd. Cir. 1950) cert denied, 314 U.S. 909 (1950).

This letter serves as notice to you that the Silver State CJ F advertisement contains
demonstrably false and defamatory statements. We demand that your station stop airing this
advertisement immediately. If you are unwilling to do so, we reserve the right to pursue any
appropriate legal action, and we request an explanation of the basis of your decision in law or
station policy.

Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this request.


Sincerely,


J ason Torchinsky
Chris Winkelman
Counsel to Adam Laxalt for
Attorney General

Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP
201 East Washington Street, Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004





Albuquerque | Casper | Colorado Springs | Denver | Las Vegas | Phoenix | Reno | Silicon Valley | Tucson | LRRLaw.com

October 3, 2014

Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP is disappointed by the television ad that recently ran regarding Adam
Laxalt. Not only does the ad falsely describe our firm's conclusions following Adams initial review,
but it ignores Adams performance in the period after that initial review. The firm also has
previously stated that the release of internal firm documents was not authorized by the firm,
making the ads use of unattributed notes in those documents especially inappropriate. The firm
stands by its previous statement that Adam is a capable and talented attorney, who made
excellent contributions to our firm, and who served his clients well.
Lewis Roca Rothgerber LLP