I'm not sure where the article is but I read Dominion took time in their filing to point out numerous examples since that last lawsuit where FoxNews, and their personalities, said that the personalities are in fact journalists and that the information on their shows is true. It may have worked once in court to claim the shows are solely for entertainment, but Dominion was smart to point out that's not what they've been saying publicly since.
From the Cornell Law site, to prove slander, the plaintiff has to prove four things: a false statement purporting to be fact publication or communication of that statement to a third person fault amounting to at least negligence damages The first two were easy to prove. The latest slew of documents showing that FOX knew it was spreading the lies, and did so for ratings purposes proves negligence. Now, if Dominion can show any damage to its business, it's case closed. I expect Fox will likely try and settle and try to weasel it's way out of claiming any responsibility. Not sure what Dominion wants to do. Are they just interested in the money? Or, do they really want to stick it to Fox and get a judgement against them, and the money is just secondary?
As an election tech company, I assume brand trust and integrity is important to Dominion. As such, they may value (or need) a public verdict over a payout. It really depends on the long term corporate goals of the company.
Maybe they'll go with the Sidney Powell defense: Sidney Powell argues in new court filing that no reasonable people would believe her election fraud claims | CNN Politics
I looked up Fox Corporations annual NI. It was $1.2B (interestingly down from $2.2B in 2021). Think of what a $1.6B judgement will do to their stock price. Good job Tucker. I wonder if his compensation $35M is strictly cash or if he has an equity component.
These assholes knowingly lie for their own gain and at the expense of the country. Charge them with treason and then shoot them. Really dont care anymore. They're no different than a foreign enemy at this point, and in fact, worse.
If the defendant is a public figure, you have to prove malice with intent to harm which is a higher standard than negligence (that standard is from a SCOTUS case years ago).
Well I wouldn’t consider dominion a public figure, no one had even heard of them until the nutters started their fever dreams over election fraud.
Fox has already been working the risk management. They have effectively battled against the claim of losses Dominion is claiming. So even if Fox loses liability, Dominion must prove damages, although a finding that our leading news source' according to viewers, knowingly propagates lies for money, is pretty damning itself.
Or with "or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." There seems to be enough evidence to allow a jury to determine whether the statements from the Fox News infotainment stars as well as Giuliani and Powell meet that standard. New York Times v. Sullivan (1964)
If I were Dominion, I wouldn't settle. They have Fox and company pretty well nailed on this. They filed an extremely extensive motion for summary judgement which is difficult to get in a malice case. They've got a decent shot at it. Fox also has very deep pockets. I say go for it.
Wouldn't work, their disciples would just tell each other they were only saying that becauses the lawyers made them do it.
Dominion has those lying bastards at Fox by the balls. I hope they put them out of business. We've always know they straight lied - but it's nice to be proven right beyond any reasonable doubt.
MAGA will not respect the court's decision regardless of the evidence. Tucker, et al, will apologize and then the next day claim it was under duress.
I think it was a bluff for leverage, banking on Dominion wanting some aspects of their business practices not to be subjected to scrutiny and/or exposed and made public. Perhaps in retrospect, a bit of projection by Fox. Whatever else it was or may have been, it was also necessary. It would be patently derelict not to seek discovery. Lose and the attorneys failed to seek discovery, and they offer themselves up as co-liable. Losing bc of what came to light in dicovery, means it was uncovered truth due to client's actions, while losing due to what attorneys failed to discover about opposing party for failing to seek discy, is easily transferred to the attorneys. Fwiw.
