Posted on 02/12/2024 5:35:12 AM PST by Twotone
As many of you know, late on Thursday a Washington, DC jury found that
a) plaintiff Michael E Mann had suffered no actual damages from Steyn's National Review post; but
b) ordered defendant Steyn to pay him one million dollars anyway.
Late on Friday, the otherwise lethargic District of Columbia Superior Court entered the jury's verdict in final judgment.
What happens now? Well, in the next few weeks, there will be certain "renewed" motions from defendants that one is obliged to do, although they are highly unlikely to find favor with Judge Irving. After that, the case will be appealed by all parties - loser Steyn because he wants the decision overturned, and winner Mann because he wants the original corporate defendants, National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute, put back in the dock. (Irving, the "fifth trial judge", dismissed them from the case a couple of years back.)
The DC Court of Appeals, being the way it is, is likely to accede to Mann's wishes, but not Steyn's. How long that will take is hard to say, but, given the length of the last merely "interlocutory" appeal, it's unlikely to be quick. At that point, Mark will go to the US Supreme Court. A minimum of four out of nine judges is required to grant a writ of certiorari and hear the case. As Amy K Mitchell noted on Friday, one of them, Samuel Alito, grasped the implications of Mann vs Steyn half-a-decade back:
(Excerpt) Read more at steynonline.com ...
God bless Mark for soldiering on... and we can pray that God returns his health and gives him good finances to do so.
How did that huckster Mann get this into the DC courts?
I’ve wondered about that a lot. Can you just say “We Will Not Respond Because You Have No Jurisdiction”? Mann didn’t live in DC. Neither did Steyn. There should’ve been a way to refuse to comply.
I wish Mark the best of luck, but I fear hw will find no justice in DC (Den of Corruption).
Probably not much in the UK either. His Ofcom trial is coming up there soon.
It seems a question of where “the crime” was committed.
As Justice Alito is quoted in the article:
“And when, as is often the case, allegedly defamatory speech is disseminated nationally, a plaintiff may be able to bring suit in whichever jurisdiction seems likely to have the highest percentage of jurors who are sympathetic to the plaintiff ‘s point of view.”
But since it is around a constitutional issue, it should’ve been in federal court to start with. I’m glad there is a God & he will have the last laugh. It’s hard to watch the lefties torture & destroy conservatives with lawfare.
No, a defamation claim is a civil matter. Constitutional Free Speech is “just” a defensive move.
The mockery of what was supposed to be a nation built on the rule law is deplorable, but there it is, right in everyone’s face.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.