Comments by "RiteMo LawBks" (@ritemolawbks8012) on "CNBC Television"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@atx4fun Are you thinking the judge dismissed the case without having established precedent?
I haven't read the order and am definitely not giving legal advice on state law, but the jury only answers questions of "fact." It's possible that no evidence of "malice" was uncovered during discovery, so NYT could have asked the judge for a summary judgment based on "law."
Regardless of the jury's decision, if the law doesn't support the case, then the Jury's determinations are futile and moot because no case exists for them to consider.
It's in a federal court because Palin and the NYT headquarters are in different states (and the claim > $75,000), but the judge is applying New York State Law for tort and personal injury claims.
Defamation cases are hard to prove in any state if the Plaintiff is a public figure. The NYT may have definitely harmed Palin's reputation, but they issued a retraction of the error.
I don't remember the name (I think it's was Sandman), but there was a high school kid who went to Washington, DC, and was there with a Native American group. He was able to sue CNN and settle with them. He had a valid defamation claim mostly because he wasn't a celebrity or public figure, and the requirement to prove "malice" wasn't necessary.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1