Comments on: Jury awards Hulk Hogan $115 million against Gawker

By: March 23 roundup - Overlawyered

March 23 roundup - Overlawyered — Wed, 23 Mar 2016 04:30:04 +0000

[…] supersedeas appeal bond limits, sought by tort reformers, may now save Gawker from ruin [WLF, earlier] Plus a Florida appellate court ruling on newsworthiness, and other reasons the scurrilous media […]

By: asdfasdf

asdfasdf — Mon, 21 Mar 2016 00:22:26 +0000

An analysis of Gawker’s appellate chances in this case is here: http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/media/2016/03/8594339/jury-awards-hulk-hogan-115-million-gawker-looks-appeal . The analysis concludes that Gawker has excellent chances on appeal.

By: WHAMU

WHAMU — Sun, 20 Mar 2016 17:44:42 +0000

Looks like Hulkamania ran wild in the jury!

By: asdfasdf

asdfasdf — Sun, 20 Mar 2016 08:27:32 +0000

One concern I have with this case is that it is one of the very rare large jury awards that seems eminently reasonable to most observers (including myself for that matter). Gawker’s bizarrely unrepentant and aggressive litigation and public relations posture risks harming the cause of tort reform: its public machinations to delay compensating the plaintiff, and its procedural whining just make tort defendants look conniving.

It’s unfortunate since generally it is tort defendants who would benefit from more procedural protections, not plaintiffs – except in this cases.

I personally cannot recall a less sympathetic tort defendant in a major case like this. The principals were on the stand making offensive jokes, and the principals for the defendant came across on the stand and in media statements like literal sociopaths who seemed to be daring the jury to find them liable.

By: asdfasdf

asdfasdf — Sat, 19 Mar 2016 10:29:04 +0000

The Daulerio cross examination in the Gawker case by plaintiff’s attorney Shane Vogt was incisive and devastating, reminded me of Edward Carson.

By: MattS

MattS — Sat, 19 Mar 2016 06:01:25 +0000

“On appeal, the defendant will press its contention that the contents of the tape were newsworthy, a category that allows broader use of material that otherwise would invade privacy.”

If there is a shred of sanity left in our court system, that argument, in regards to a sex tape that is not evidence of a crime committed by one of the people on the tape, will be laughed out of court.

Newsworthy my Aunt Annie’s Ass. Big A little a AAa.