BIRMINGHAM, Ala. — A lawsuit over the hit podcast “S-Town,” which tells the story of a man’s troubled life and death in rural Alabama, is headed to mediation.
WIAT-TV reported that lawyers for the estate of the key character in “S-Town,” John B. McLemore, and attorneys for the producer have selected a mediator to work on a settlement. Tom Woodall, a former justice on the Alabama Supreme Court, will handle the case, according to a court document filed Wednesday.
“S-Town” was released in 2017 and has been downloaded more than 92 million times, making it immensely popular in the world of podcasts. The serialized audio show tells the story of McLemore, an antique clock restorer from rural Woodstock, located west of Birmingham.
McLemore called the community “S-Town,” although he spelled out the first word. He died before the show was released and his grave is sometimes visited by fans of the podcast.
Dennis Bailey, an attorney representing the “S-Town” team, said the mediation attempt, ordered by U.S. District Judge Scott Coogler, is “standard practice” is such a civil lawsuit.
“It’s just part of the customary actions in a civil case where you’re encouraged to mediate,” Bailey said.
McLemore’s estate sued in federal court in 2018 contending a team that included podcast host Brian Reed, Serial Productions and This American Life didn’t have a legal right to make money off McLemore’s story. The podcast revealed details of his sexual orientation and mental struggles.
The “S-Town” makers claim their work is protected under the First Amendment. Because the podcast is journalism, it is exempt from an Alabama law which says a person’s identity can’t be used to sell merchandise or endorse products without permission, they contend.
Bailey said he didn’t know if the case could be settled. “I wouldn’t even speculate if this can be resolved,” he said.
Cooper Shattuck, an attorney representing McLemore’s estate, said Friday he hoped the dispute can be resolved in talks.
“If not, we will be ready for trial,” he said.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less