With that in mind, I’m wondering if this was simply Palin’s way of humiliating the NYT by exposing its staff as a bunch of political hacks and incompetent misfits.
The threshold is higher for a public figure, but not insurmountable.
The standard is a blatant disregard of the truth or malicious intent.
Palin’s attorney certain established factual evidence that a jury could meet the standard. The judge was totally out of line, especially after the Circuit Court of Appeals sent the case back down for a trial on the facts. If the COA believed the factual allegations were insufficient, it would have upheld the first dismissal by the District Court Judge. At a minimum, the Judge was pretty much required to let the jury make a decision. As it stands now, the Circuit Court will order a new trial with a different Judge.
Keep in mind that juries determines the facts and apply them to the law. It is not the role of the judge, in most cases, to determine the facts. That is the for the jury to decide. It is possible that a judge could do a JNOV, AFTER the jury verdict.
If Palin won, it would give the Circuit Court the option of reinstating the verdict.
As it stands, this corrupt judge tied the hands of the Circuit Court. It is possible, but highly unlikely, the Circuit Court could rule that Palin proved her case and send it back down for the determination of damages. This is because if Palin won at trial, the NYT would appeal and the Circuit Court would have to decide based on the evidence anyway. As I said, that is pretty much not going to happen.
The Circuit Court will vacate the District Court’s dismissal and order a retrial.