Civil Rights & Constitutional Law
Chandra Law obtains $2,000,750 jury verdict for former police chief LaMont Lockhart against the...
December 15, 2008
Thursday, June 4, 2026

Congressman Max Miller and hot water: accused of abuse and, a court filing argues, effectively admitting to the gist and sting of the allegation.
CLEVELAND, OH – Emily Moreno has filed a second formal supplement to her anti-SLAPP motion under Ohio’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act (UPEPA) for expedited relief in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas. The new filing argues that Congressman Max Miller has accidentally destroyed his own defamation lawsuit by providing the media with an audio recording of himself effectively admitting to the alleged underlying abuse.
On Wednesday, June 3, 2026, the New York Post published an audio recording that Congressman Miller secretly recorded and personally provided to the outlet. In his defamation complaint, Miller had claimed that accusations he threw scalding water on Ms. Moreno during a June 2024 argument were completely false.
But, today’s second supplement notes, the Congressman's own audio leak proves the substantial truth of the incident:
Ms. Moreno's counsel filed Congressman Miller's recording with the court along with the second supplement.
Because truth and substantial truth are absolute defenses to defamation under Ohio law, Ms. Moreno's legal team argues that Miller's own recording legally decimates his claims. Whether the water was boiling from a pot or steaming from the sink sprayer, Miller explicitly confirmed that he soaked her and didn’t deny that it was “steaming hot water.”
Beyond confirming the truth, the audio recording reveals that Congressman Miller openly gave Ms. Moreno permission to share the evidence of his actions. On the recording, Miller states:
“If you want to accuse me of abuse by showing photos and no video evidence of something that I wasn't even being abusive for, by all means, go ahead and do that.”
Under long-standing defamation and tort law, invited defamation or consent is a complete defense to any defamation action.
The second supplement further argues that Congressman Miller's lawsuit is legally frivolous because he is effectively “defamation-proof.” Under U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit legal precedent, when a plaintiff's public reputation for a specific trait is already exceptionally poor, a court will not award damages for further alleged harm.
The filing cites extensive previous news coverage, outlines how for years, national media outlets have documented Miller’s history of alleged volatile behavior, an alleged anger problem, and domestic-abuse allegations from multiple romantic partners—including former White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham. By distributing an audio recording of himself admitting to scalding his ex-wife, Miller has engaged in what the second supplement calls “reputational self-immolation.”
The second supplement also argues that Miller's media leak directly violated a June 1, 2026 domestic-relations-court order from Visiting Judge Debra L. Boros explicitly banning both parties from using third parties, social media, and electronic devices to threaten, harass, or annoy the other.
Ms. Moreno’s lead counsel, Subodh Chandra, said:
This is no longer a he-said/she-said case; it is a Miller-said/Miller-said case. Congressman Miller used his vast resources to prompt the New York Post to publish secret audio, thinking it would vindicate him. Instead, our filing argues, he trapped himself by admitting to the very scalding-water assault he claimed was a lie.
Congressman Miller also explicitly dared Ms. Moreno to show the public the photos of her injuries. He is a "defamation-proof" plaintiff who has incinerated his own standing. If Congressman Miller doesn’t care enough about his own reputation to stop his reputational self-immolation, courts shouldn't protect him either. This abusive lawsuit must be dismissed, and Miller must pay the mandatory attorney fees and costs required under Ohio's anti-SLAPP statute.
Ms. Moreno is represented in this matter by Subodh Chandra and Emily Bohatch. The case is captioned Miller v. Moreno, et al., Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas General Division Case No. 26-138810, and is before Judge Joy Kennedy. Ms. Moreno's motion for expedited relief through dismissal may be found here. The first supplement to that motion from June 3, 2026, based on additional conduct by Rep. Miller may be found here. Today's second supplement based on Miller's most recent conduct may be found here. The audio recording is available through here or from the Cuyahoga County Clerk of Courts.
The Chandra Law Firm LLC is solely responsible for the content of this website.
©2026 The Chandra Law Firm LLC.