Verdict – Live blogging
We STILL are waiting for the verdict from the trial in Dallas. According to the bailiff, the jury will be done by noon today. All of this time does not bode well for the good guys. However, the jury has asked two questions they sent to the judge. The first was about what happens if they can’t get the same 10 people to agree on all counts and does that make them a “hung jury” (I suspect this is what they would like to happen). The judge asked them to go back and work harder as they need the same ten jurors to agree on all issues. The second question was much more encouraging. The jury sent another note to the judge early yesterday asking if they could award zero damages when the jury instruction says if they found the answer to question 10 (the most critical question or issue they will decide: liability) to be “yes” then they should award “nominal damages”. The question was: can zero be nominal damages? The judge told them no.
We continue to wait…continued in comment thread…
VERDICT IN: SEE COMMENTS
Just after posting the above, I got his e-mail:
“The jury asked, when discussing past and future damages, what is the cutoff date.
The judge responded that the jury should consider the evidence and the Court’s charge.”
SHIT.
The jury has broken for lunch. They are to be back at it at 1:00 Central…(currently 12:30pm)
An offer was made (not by SCIC) of $500k. Not a bad move, but I have some confidence in the case still.
The other side has not responded to the offer.
Wow… good stuff. I hope a goose eggs comes down but it don’t sound like that’ll happen…
After the thing is over you’ll have to gimme some details of the case…
The case is, in short, a defamation case. Causes of action include tortious interference with contract and slander (the old per se or per quod argument). It is a long story, but really boils down to a couple of e-mails concerning the cancellation of a planned event.
It is very silly to have spent this much money (large into the six figures) on this stupid case.
I cannot continue at this time…more later. Must enjoy daylight.
Oh, some reporter you are!
It could be hours…I have an errand or two to run. It is gorgeous outside. More as soon as we know.
waiting… waiting… waiting…
What the hell is wrong with your jury?
Read this and you tell me (nearly verbatim and direct from my e-mail moments ago):
“The jury has returned a verdict. On the whole, the verdict is very favorable to the DEFENSE. The specific answers are as follows:
1) No on tortious interference
2) No on business disparagement
3) Statement regarding disengaging the defendant was defamatory but the jury also found that we proved our defense of substantial truth. Therefore, no damages on this question.
4) Statement regarding workstyles and ethical approach was defamatory.
However, the jury found that we proved the defense of qualified privilege. Even though the jury found that the qualified privilege defense applied, the jury nevertheless awarded Plaintiff #1 damages of $25,000 and Plaintiff #2 damages of $18,000 based on the making of this statement. We will contest the jury’s award of damages on this finding based on their answer that the qualified privilege defense applied.
5) Statement regarding being led to believe Plaintiff #1 was the dean of the local university business school was defamatory and the jury did not answer any positively on any affirmative defenses. The jury awarded Plaintiff #1 damages of $35,000 and Plaintiff #2 damages of $18,000 based on the making of this statement.
6) No on malice as a predicate to exemplary damages. Therefore, no exemplary damages.
In sum, because the jury found that an affirmative defense applied to the second statement, the only damages that can be awarded based on the verdict are those awarded under paragraph 5, which total $35,000 for Dipshit #1 and $18,000 for Dipshit #2.
After the jury returned the verdict, lawyers for both sides were permitted to speak to the jury. On the whole, the jurors were complimentary of both sides, but felt that our damages expert was more persuasive than the plaintiffs’ damages expert. In addition, several jurors specifically commented that the defense attorney’s closing was quite strong and solidified the position that the plaintiffs were not entitled to what they were asking for.”
Somebody made a half a million dollar mistake today…
If my legal counsel told me to ignore a $500,000 settlement because I would get more and I ended up getting about 5% of the settlement offer…
Me thinks someone else is gonna get sued.
I have had that thought for quite some time now. However, it is always up to the client if they want to settle or not. That in and of itself would not be legal malpractice. Dragging this shit on for years to end with such a result might just be. The lowest amount they ever wanted for settlement was $1 million. Another defendent settled early on in the case for $150k to get out and basically ended up funding the rest of the matter. The plaintiff’s sort of had nothing to lose until they turned down $500k and got $53k. Had we been given the chance to settle for a hundred and a half, we would have taken it. At one time we and the other carrier put up $250k, but they still wanted at least a million.
Greedy bastards and fucktards iffin you ask me.
On further hindsight, I think the judge screwed us over on this with some of her rulings and the answers she gave to the jurors questions. I am mostly satisfied with the verdict and since we will not have to pay it (all intentional acts are not covered) it is OK by me.
It sounds like the plaintiffs won’t get any of it anyway… the attorney will take…what, 40% and then there are costs… Losers… $500K flushed down the toilet… I bet they have a hard time sleeping.
Another interesting aspect of this case was that the plaintiff attorney and his client worked out a deal with the settlement with the other defendant. They tok almost all of that $150k and said that would be their fee.
LMAO…so they basically went through all this shit to make some cash for a couple of ambulance chasers. Karma is a bitch man!!!!
Indeed. I have now reported on this case to most of the planet (you might imagine how many folks at SCIC are interested) and they now want me to “present” the case on an upcoming nationwide conference call. I think I may read this thread to the group.
You should read this shithole thread to the fucking group, the bastards! Especially this turd licking comment.