DC jury sets absurdly high punitive damages for Giuliani in defamation suit
They are trying their best to destroy him. Here’s the latest effort:
A jury comprising eight Washington, D.C., residents awarded ex-Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss $148,169,000 in their defamation suit against Rudy Giuliani on Friday.
More here:
There was an audible gasp in the courtroom when the jury foreperson read aloud the $75 million award in punitive damages for the women. Moss and Freeman were each awarded another roughly $36 million in other damages.
Giuliani didn’t appear to show any emotion as the verdict was read after about 10 hours of deliberations. Moss and Freeman hugged their attorneys after the jury left the courtroom and didn’t look at Giuliani as he left with his lawyer.
Giuliani told reporters outside Washington’s federal courthouse that he will appeal, saying the “absurdity of the number merely underscores the absurdity of the entire proceeding.”
“It will be reversed so quickly it will make your head spin, and the absurd number that just came in will help that actually,” he said.
Why DC for this particular case? You know why – DC juries will be as Draconian as possible. Plus, if the suit had occurred in Georgia, such an award would not have happened:
A $250,000 cap in punitive damages is constitutional, the Georgia Supreme Court has confirmed, upholding the trial court’s decision to substantially reduce a $50 million verdict to $250,000. Taylor v. Devereux Found., Inc., Nos. S22A1060, S22X1061, 2023 Ga. LEXIS 63 (Mar. 15, 2023).
Additionally, the Court ruled that the cap imposed by the law did not infringe on the right to a fair trial by jury, separation of powers, or the guarantee of equal protection.
Like many states, Georgia imposes a statutory cap on punitive damages. The cap limits punitive damages to a specific dollar amount of $250,000. There are some limited exceptions to this cap, however. For example, in cases of product liability, when the defendant acted with the specific intent to harm, or when the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or drugs, the $250,000 cap does not apply.
In addition, in the Giuliani case, the harm to the plaintiffs was from death threats, although no one had attacked the women and Giuliani did not threaten them or tell people to do so.
Giuliani also faces criminal charges in the Georgia case against Trump.
SCOTUS has ruled previously on limits to punitive damages, but usually the guidelines involve punitive damages as a multiple of compensatory damages. In the Giuliani defamation case, the compensatory damages are also hugely out of whack already, so I believe the huge punitive award wouldn’t violate the letter of those previous rulings, although it might violate the spirit. Many of these cases are against large companies rather than private individuals.
Giuliani doesn’t have that kind of money, so he could go into bankruptcy, but apparently he’d always be liable because bankruptcy wouldn’t cancel the debt (see the Alex Jones case – which also had the element of Jones’ defamatory statements being held to have been “willful and malicious” with “intent to harm.”)
Here’s more background on the case, which has been complicated. The present jury trial was only about compensation because the judge had previously ruled against Giuliani on the merits, but for what I consider an unusual reason related to the lawfare against Giuliani and his reaction to it:
A federal judge has determined that Rudy Giuliani has lost a defamation lawsuit from two Georgia election workers against him after he failed to provide information sought in subpoenas. …
In court in recent weeks, Giuliani said he could no longer contest that he made false and defamatory statements about Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss …
Giuliani said he struggled to maintain his own access to his electronic records – partly because of the cost – and didn’t adequately respond to subpoenas for information from Moss and Freeman as the case moved forward.
Among other things, Giuliani has been required to pay not only his own attorney’s fees but also those of the plaintiffs. What’s more:
Giuliani has been struggling financially, buried under 2020 election legal proceedings, a new criminal case against him in Georgia related to efforts to overturn the election and other matters. …
Ted Goodman, a political adviser to Giuliani, said in a statement that Howell’s decision was “a prime example of the weaponization of our justice system, where the process is the punishment.” Goodman added that Giuliani was “wrongly accused” of failing to preserve his own records and that he wanted Howell’s decision to be reversed. …
Giuliani had claimed that the FBI seizure of his electronic devices years ago had complicated his ability to access his records and that he had struggled under pricey legal fees. But Howell said he could have taken steps at an earlier point to keep his records in case litigation arose in the future.
The judge also noted that while Giuliani complained to the court that he was buried in litigation costs, he was able to get Trump’s reimbursement for his electronic legal debts, listed his Manhattan co-op apartment for $6.5 million and traveled on a private plane to report to jail for processing in Fulton County, Georgia, last week.
Doesn’t putting one’s residence up for sale indicate the need to raise money?
That said, I think Giuliani was very unwise to claim what he did about these workers without ironclad proof. I understand having suspicions, but he should have known better than to make such strong and detailed accusations. That doesn’t mean that this award amount is anywhere near correct, though. It is not. Will it stand? I certainly hope not.
[NOTE: I haven’t seen many bloggers on the right covering this. I’m not sure why that is.]
The damages, actual and punitive, seem really excessive.
Kate
He is tied to Trump and must be destroyed. Since the DC area population is composed overwhelmingly of lefties/progs they have weaponized the institutions against their enemies.
Well, so much for Rudy’s heroic leadership on 9-11 and in the aftermath of the attacks. No consideration for what he did. No good deed goes unpunished.
I’m curious: what was the racial composition of the jury?
You do know why I’m asking.
Well, so much for Rudy’s heroic leadership on 9-11 and in the aftermath of the attacks. Or for saving NYC from itself during his tenure as mayor.
No consideration for his service. No good deed goes unpunished.
I’m curious: what was the racial composition of the jury?
You do know why I’m asking.
What we are seeing is a blatant attempt to stop Republicans from questioning election results. Poor Rudy thought he was doing the Lord’s work. (And he was.) If these charges and penalties stand, what Republican will dare question an election result?
No way can anyone believe these two women lost 148 million in wages, lifestyle erosion, and mental suffering. It’s a warning shot to all Republicans – don’t question election results, PERIOD!
This is where we are and it’s an awful place to be.
he wasn’t allowed to present evidence, like videos, that are readily available, it was a travesty of mockery of sham (from that early woody allen film)
now Beryl Howell was the judge that stripped Trump of his immunity, and allowed them to access his twitter account,
in another ring of the circus
https://www.nysun.com/article/chesebro-and-powell-do-the-bare-minimum-in-their-handwritten-apologies-in-trumps-georgia-case-will-they-do-the-same-on-the-stand
IrishOtter:
I believe it was 6 whites and 2 blacks.
The DC jury pool continually outdoes itself. I’ve commented on them a few times before. Drawing from my prior 10 years residing in that area, I regret to say they are the lowest of the lowest of the low.
Every grave injustice that the left visits upon the right ratchets us closer to that day of terrible reckoning.
so truth can only come from teixeira or a steve baker, the rest repeat the lies about the Caucasus Crackup, or the delta house follies called January 6th, Marc Elias having abetted the criminal fisa surveillance, then moved on to demolishing the legitimate vote, and now strips the House of any real representation,
you think so, with the 800 billion we gave our zombie pentagon, and the 702 authorization which has already prone to abuse, this is the sword we hand our adversaries,
Obviously, the democrats are going after lawyers that defend conservative causes.
https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2023/12/15/arizona-state-bar-disciplines-conservative-lawyer-targeted-by-dark-money-democrats/
If it gets bad Rudi can stay at my house.
“now Beryl Howell was the judge that stripped Trump of his immunity, and allowed them to access his twitter account,”
A one woman jihad against Trump and his allies. “Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) filed an ethics complaint on Friday [yesterday] charging election interference against Judge Beryl Howell based on a speech Howell gave last month at the Women’s White Collar Defense Association awards dinner. Howell, a former Democrat Senate Judiciary Committee staffer and Obama appointee, was awarded alongside Joe Biden’s Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco.”
Stefanic said:
“I filed a Complaint of Judicial Misconduct against Judge Beryl Howell, because election interference by judges destroys public confidence in the federal judiciary, tears apart the fabric of our Republic, and is illegal. It must end now.”
“DC Obama Judge Beryl Howell gave a highly inappropriate speech in which she insinuated the election of President Trump will lead to fascism in America. She also inappropriately allowed a public display of her cozy personal relationships with her partisan friends who appear before her, including the Biden Deputy Attorney General who supervises the January 6 criminal prosecutions.”
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/12/election-interference-ethics-complaint-against-judge-beryl-howell/
Scott Johnson did cover the award; he is not on Giuliani’s side.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/12/the-giuliani-verdict.php
What DC juries are in the business of persuading the rest of us is that DC residents should be stripped of any and all civic functions – no voting, no jury service, and no public employment bar that distributed according to competitive examinations composed and administered by people who are not DC residents.
Why would a court in DC have jurisdiction over a tort claim where the plaintiffs resided elsewhere?
Related:
Turley on the Hunter Biden Burlesque:
“Eric Swalwell and the politics of contempt”—
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/4363154-eric-swalwell-and-the-politics-of-contempt/
And a WSJ editorial on the Jack Smith travesty…
“Jack Smith and the Supreme Court;
“The special counsel tries to drag the Justices into his political timetable for the Jan. 6 trial of Donald Trump.”—
https://www.wsj.com/articles/jack-smith-and-the-supreme-court-57d78846
H/T Powerline blog (for both).
The Powerline link provided by Aesopfan underlines the challenge here.
Guliani behaved badly. A jury has now ruled that he did defame the plaintiffs, and its hard to argue the jury got that fact wrong. (The damages are another issue entirely.) He was unrepentant through trial – that’s his right, but there are consequences.
On the other hand, the practice of using DC juries and judges to punish Republicans who step out of line is a bad joke. How could anyone other than the most extreme partisan consider this to be justice? And now that there is a jury vedict and findings of fact, it will be extraordinarily hard for Guiliani to change the result. Maybe the verdict is reduced from $148M to $20M. I doubt it matters, Guiliani probably can’t pay that either.
And these people wonder why so many have lost faith in institutions? Institutions have become the plaything of the powerful, used to protect their friends and mete out retribution on their enemies.
The part that I think Trumpers miss is that, even in the current perverted state of the system, there are still limits. If Guliani hadn’t defamed these poll workers, this case wouldn’t have existed. If Trump and Guliani hadn’t pushed asinine legal theories about delaying the counting of electroral votes, or pushed litigation alleging fraud that they couldn’t prove, there would be no Georgia case and no federal J6 case. If Trump hadn’t gone out and used Hillary’s classified document caper as a “how to,” there would be no Mar-a-Lago case.
The reply is always “they’ll do this to any Republican.” Probably, but other Republicans seem to be smart enough to avoid committing actual crimes and torts. If you know that your enemy is going to try to destroy you by any means, fair or foul, maybe don’t go out and commit a crime, or a tort, or otherwise give the lawfare mavens a real hook to draw you into court.
The argument is always – “Yeah, they probably did deserve to be convicted of something, but not that.” or “Yeah, Trump’s conduct was repulsive, but it wasn’t a crime.” or “Yes, Guliani probably did defame those women, but the damages were excessive.”
Those are not a winning arguments. Leaders who put their followers in a position where they have to make those arguments are not good leaders.
Of the example arguments, I will add that they can (and often are) absolutely correct. They are absolutely political losers, however, even if correct.
No guiliani did not behave badly he cited evidence he wasnt allowed to present. The regimes zampolits were coaching them on thought crime
Yes they stole thd election and the country that is why we have 1200+ dead in israel 13 dead at abbey gate 300,000 dead in ukraine
E por se move galileos rejoinder also orwells ljne about truth telling being a revolutionary act in a time of deceit
Yes because the truth is a proper rejoinder
They didnt really have arguments just innuendo and emotion. This is the way a republic dies
General flynn wasnt guilty of what he was charged but it took three years to prove it
It sounds like something orchestrated by Freeman and Moss’s lawyers from Willkie, Farr & Gallagher. All the crying and talk of death threats. The press glorification of Ruby and Shaye. The presidential medal from Biden. The DC venue. The over-the-top financial reward.
Still, Giuliani did go too far:
Among his false accusations, Giuliani had claimed Moss handed her mother a thumb drive “like they were vials of heroin or cocaine.” In reality, Moss said in her testimony to Congress that her mother had just handed her a ginger mint.
Whether or not it was a ginger mint, how could Giuliani possibly know what Moss handed Freeman? Whatever cheating was going on, if thumb drives were involved wouldn’t it have been higher-up and behind closed doors?
As with Donald Trump, Rudy’s showmanship got the better of him and led him into dangerous waters. As with DJT, rumors bubbling up through the internet shouldn’t have been so easily believed and spread, and as with DJT, Rudy Giuliani wasn’t very well served by his own lawyers.
Press coverage says Rudy admitted beforehand in a legal document that his charges were false and actionable (“while not admitting to the truth of [their] allegations”). If the story is true, what possible reason would there have been for such a statement? Whatever the legal theory behind the document, it gave Giuliani no hope in the court of public opinion.
They were evet allowed to show the video in question (a mint does not look like a jump drive) its a cassidy hutchinson special
Truth is an absolute defense in a libel case. Yet instead of trying to prove his claims — that the plaintiffs had stuffed the ballot box with fake ballots — were true, Giuliani stipulated to liability, that is, he agreed that his comments were false and defamatory. That’s all that matters. Damages are not the main issue.
We know what beryl howell has done protecting dems and persecuting gopers doug, sell crazy somewhere else
Douglas B. Levene:
Huge damages, way out of line with anything reasonable under the circumstances, are indeed a huge issue.
Abraxas:
In terms of damage awards, and particularly punitive damages, it doesn’t just matter whether the statements were true or false. It matters whether the defendant believed them to be true at the time, versus whether he knew they were false and made them maliciously and/or with reckless disregard for their truth or falsehood. Giuliani admitting to the court that the statements were false would not be an admission about his state of mind at the time he made the original statements.
As I already wrote, however, he should never have made the statements in the first place without absolute ironclad evidence.
Miguel cervantes – Guiliani conceded that the statements he made were false, but argued that he had had a first amendment right to lie about the defendants. That was independent of the judge later finding liability because Guliani failed to comply with discovery requests.
The man behaved badly. He made statements about the poll workers that he did not have the evidence to establish. It doesn’t appear to be the case that he was trying to establish the truth of his statements and failed. He didn’t even try. He stipulated that his statements were false.
That’s not to say that the damages were OK. They were not, to the level of being abusive. But don’t pretend that Rudy didn’t do anything wrong.
Bauxite:
You write: “A jury has now ruled that he did defame the plaintiffs, and its hard to argue the jury got that fact wrong.”
Please read the last half of my post. A jury found no such thing. The jury only ruled on damages. The judge had ruled that Giuliani defamed the plaintiffs, and he didn’t make that ruling on the merits. The judge made the ruling due to Giuliani’ failure to provide certain information, and Giuliani’s defense was the claim “that the FBI seizure of his electronic devices years ago had complicated his ability to access his records and that he had struggled under pricey legal fees.”
However, as I already wrote, Giuliani never should have made the statements against the poll workers without absolutely ironclad evidence. He didn’t have that evidence.
Art Deco:
My guess is because Giuliani made his statements in DC.
I saw what they did to katherine harris to ken blackwell
He told greg kelly he is solvent for now.
But as we see this is an appendage of the 65 project that has gone after bannon navarro clark eastman
Furthermore a trial on the dominion machine is finally coming to bear a hearing that should have been done in october 2020
That cnn byline assures us they could never get a clue even if they got it for free
Act Blue recruit runs his mouth.
neo – You are correct about the jury verdict on liability.
https://thefederalist.com/2023/12/18/meet-lawyer-michael-dreeben-the-man-behind-three-major-anti-trump-operations/