April 14, 2026  ·  Updated July 14, 2026

By David Brunk, civil litigation attorney

Read the complaint

Marier v. Smith Seeks $1,220,264 in Damages for Alleged Defamation and Breach of Partnership

Charles Marier has filed a complaint against Rodney Smith in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Lane, alleging several violations stemming from their collaborative efforts on the "Watch It Played" YouTube channel. Filed on April 14, 2026, the complaint contends that Smith's actions resulted in financial and reputational damages to Marier following the dissolution of an informal partnership. The filing asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, false light, and defamation, among others.

According to Marier, the partnership, established under Oregon law, involved shared management and revenue from the "Watch It Played" channel and its associated Patreon. Marier alleges that Smith undermined the terms of their agreed separation by making false public statements, which led to economic damages amounting to $220,264 and noneconomic damages totaling $1,000,000. Marier's complaint cites specific instances where Smith's publications hindered his business operations, resulting in a substantial decline in sponsorship revenue.

The lawsuit's core allegations revolve around the claim that Smith breached fiduciary duties by publicly misrepresenting Marier's business practices and withholding shared revenue. The complaint specifically notes Smith's alleged actions of publishing false statements regarding Marier and exerting pressure on Marier to fabricate narratives about their December 18 meeting (Compl. ¶49). Additionally, Smith allegedly misappropriated joint assets by keeping the revenues generated from Patreon without distributing Marier's share (Compl. ¶54). The allegations remain unproven, and Smith has yet to respond to the filing.

Alleged Breach of Informal Partnership

The complaint filed by Charles Marier on April 14, 2026, against Rodney Smith includes allegations of a breach of an informal partnership. According to the complaint, Marier and Smith entered into a collaborative business relationship on March 21, 2020, to jointly manage the "Watch It Played" YouTube channel, where both contributed to content creation and management tasks. The filing claims this relationship involved an equal sharing of control and profits, as evidenced by the mutual Manager-level access to the channel's analytics and revenue data, reflecting a partnership structure.

The parties had an agreed structure for splitting the channel's profits, with both Marier and Smith receiving a 25% share of the income from the associated Patreon account launched in January 2021. The remaining 50% was allocated to other team members or a reserve, underscoring the collaborative nature of their business operations. Non-parties, including former team members Matthew, Paula, Mon’nique, and Naveen, as well as multiple unnamed publishers in the board game industry, were also part of this professional ecosystem influenced by the partnership dynamics.

Marier contends this informal partnership was breached by Smith, leading to significant economic and reputational harm, as set forth in the legal claims presented.

These allegations remain unproven, and no response has yet been filed by the defendant, Rodney Smith.

Financial Aspects of Partnership

The complaint filed by Charles Marier details certain financial arrangements that were in place between him and Rodney Smith during their collaborative business relationship, which focused on the "Watch It Played" channel. According to the complaint, in December 2020, Smith provided Marier with a holiday bonus payment of $3,000. This bonus was part of the overall financial considerations within their partnership.

Additionally, the complaint outlines a structured subsidy payment agreement that was established in February 2021. Under this framework, Marier was to receive approximately $23,999.99 annually from Smith. This amount was determined using a specific formula ($63.61 × days in the month + $10.03 × month number) (Compl. ¶17). The stipulated subsidy appears designed to ensure a consistent flow of financial support for Marier as part of his involvement in the partnership's activities.

Over the 12 months preceding the filing of the complaint, Marier's associated ventures, Game Night Picks and TableTop Media Makers, reportedly generated a combined total revenue of $64,873. This revenue figure highlights the financial stakes and business interests that were part of the collaborative undertakings between Marier and Smith, indicating the scale of operations that could be affected by the alleged breaches.

Marier's financial grievances extend to concerns about his share of AdSense, live event profits, video revenues, and subscribers, which he claims were not properly distributed following alleged mismanagement and withholding by Smith. These omissions are pivotal in Marier's economic claims against Smith.

Plaintiff's Economic Claims: Damages and Losses

The complaint alleges that following the publications by Rodney Smith, Charles Marier has suffered significant economic losses. Marier is seeking $220,264 in economic damages, which he attributes to reduced sponsorship opportunities and diminished revenue streams as a direct result of the accusations made by Smith. According to the filing, these accusations have had a profound impact on Marier's business, particularly affecting the ability to secure and maintain sponsorships.

The filing cites specific contract cancellations and refunds precipitated by Smith's statements. On February 9, 2026, Publisher B cancelled ads worth $4,330.00. The following day, Publisher C reversed satisfaction and issued refunds totaling $2,439.24 (Compl. ¶81(b)(iii)). These cancellations substantiating Marier's claim that the defamatory statements damaged his business relationships and led to documented losses amounting to $14,833.65 (Compl. ¶81(b), (e)).

In addition to the direct financial losses, Marier has experienced a complete cessation of new sponsorships since the dissemination of Smith's assertions. This has allegedly resulted in a consistent decline in sponsorship revenue, which the complaint uses as evidence of the ongoing nature of the economic harm Marier faces. The case underscores the financial ramifications of the alleged defamation and the subsequent impact on Marier's business operations and revenue generation capabilities.

Claims of Breach and Defamation under Oregon Statutes

The complaint filed by Charles Marier claims a breach of fiduciary duty of loyalty by Rodney Smith under ORS 67.155(2), which governs partner obligations in Oregon partnerships. Marier alleges that Smith violated this duty by publishing false statements that tarnished Marier's reputation and undermined the amicable dissolution agreement they had reached. The filing asserts that the dissemination of false information constituted a direct betrayal of the fiduciary responsibilities that had existed due to their informal business partnership. Marier seeks compensatory damages and disgorgement of profits as a result of this alleged breach.

The third claim for relief pleads common-law defamation. The complaint argues that ORS 31.210 does not apply to the publications at issue and, in the alternative, that a retraction demand satisfying ORS 31.215 was served. Marier contends that Smith's statements publicly misrepresented Marier's business practices, falsely implying unethical behavior and financial misconduct. The complaint details several purportedly false statements made by Smith, including claims that Marier used fraudulent practices to gain YouTube subscribers and that he promised specific view counts to advertisers—allegations that Marier argues led to the erosion of his professional standing and financial opportunities.

Marier asserts that these alleged defamatory statements constitute defamation per se, as they directly impugn his competence and integrity in his professional domain. He claims the statements were maliciously crafted to harm his reputation and the viability of Game Night Picks, which resulted in a complete cessation of sponsorship revenue and significant operational distress. As relief, Marier seeks the removal of these statements, alongside monetary compensation for reputational and economic damages.

Additional Claims: False Light and Declaratory Judgment

The complaint filed by Charles Marier against Rodney Smith includes a second claim for relief asserting that Marier was portrayed in a false light, an invasion of privacy claim under Oregon law. According to the complaint, Smith's publications allegedly misrepresented Marier's actions and business ethics, casting him misleadingly to the public. Specifically, the complaint references problematic portrayals stemming from Smith's statements, leading to reputational damage for Marier. The false light claim ties into claims of defamation, where Marier contends that these representations have unjustly harmed his professional standing and caused emotional distress.

In a fourth claim, Marier seeks a declaratory judgment under ORS 28.010 to clarify the parties' rights, particularly surrounding confidentiality and business obligations post-partnership. This request arises from Marier's allegations of Smith's misuse of confidential information during and subsequent to their professional relationship. Marier asserts that such a judgment is necessary to definitively establish the remaining duties and information rights related to their dissolved business collaboration.

The complaint underscores that the failure to resolve these issues through mutual understanding and the purported misuse of proprietary data by Smith have compounded Marier's injuries. Marier asks the court to officially ascertain the scope of the confidentiality agreements and any continuing responsibilities both parties might hold, offering legal clarity that, according to Marier, has become essential in the wake of their dissolved partnership.

These allegations remain unproven, and no responses have been filed by the defendant at this stage.

Distinctive Pleadings: Public Statements and Partnership Exit

In the complaint filed on April 14, 2026, Charles Marier asserts that Rodney Smith breached their agreement to dissolve an informal partnership amicably by publishing false statements on February 9, 2026. According to the filing, these public accusations depicted Marier as engaging in unethical business practices and resulted in significant reputational damage. The complaint attributes these statements to Smith's February 9 publications across various platforms, which allegedly included false claims about Marier's professional conduct. Specifically, Marier is accused by Smith of misleading business practices, which Marier contends are unfounded and defamatory.

The complaint argues that the failure to fulfill the planned dissolution, alongside the public dissemination of false statements, not only contravened the terms of exit but also contributed to Marier's financial and reputational harm. The filing further notes that Marier's business relationships with third-party publishers were adversely impacted, evidenced by the cancellation of sponsorship agreements following Smith's remarks. These actions, according to the complaint, resulted in Marier requesting both economic and non-economic damages to remedy the alleged breaches and defamation.

Relief Sought and Procedural Posture

Charles Marier, the plaintiff in the case Marier v. Smith, seeks significant financial recompense and legal remedies due to alleged reputational harm and emotional distress caused by Rodney Smith's actions. The complaint requests $1,000,000 in noneconomic damages, reflecting the alleged damage to Marier's reputation and the emotional impact of Smith's public statements, which Marier contends were defamatory. Marier argues that these statements have had lasting repercussions on his professional standing and personal well-being.

In addition to monetary compensation, Marier is pursuing injunctive relief aimed at mitigating the ongoing damage to his reputation. This includes a court order for the removal of the defamatory statements from public platforms and a requirement for Smith to issue a retraction or correction of those statements. According to the complaint, Marier has formally demanded a retraction, but Smith has allegedly failed to comply with this request, necessitating judicial intervention.

The legal proceedings, filed in the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for the County of Lane on April 14, 2026, are currently in the initial stages, with Marier awaiting a response from the defendant. The claims include breach of fiduciary duty under ORS 67.155(2), false light, and common-law defamation; the complaint argues that ORS 31.210 does not apply to the publications at issue.

The allegations remain unproven at this time, and no response has been filed by the defendant. The case's outcome will hinge on the court's interpretation of the alleged breach of fiduciary duties, the veracity of the contested statements, and their impact on Marier's professional and personal life.

The allegations described here are taken from the filing and remain unproven; no responsive pleading is reflected in the source document.

The allegations described here are taken from the filing and remain unproven; no responsive pleading is reflected in the source document.

David Brunk is a civil litigation attorney. He can be reached at david@newmanbrunk.com.