How did the Jury come up with a $148,169,000 Verdict in the Rudy Giuliani Case?
In a recent defamation case involving Rudy Giuliani, a substantial verdict of $148 million was delivered. The process behind arriving at such a figure can often seem opaque to those unfamiliar with the legal system. Barrett Brewer, a seasoned attorney from the Brewer Law Firm, LLC, provides his insights into how these damages were calculated in this high-profile case.
Understanding the Damages
In this particular case against Rudy Giuliani, the jury awarded each of the two plaintiffs – Miss Moss and Ms. Freeman – $16 million for compensatory damages related to defamation, and another $20 million each for intentional infliction of emotional distress. This significant sum naturally raises the question: How exactly did the jury come up with these figures?
The Crucial Role of Record-Keeping
From my experience, one of the most important elements in such cases is exhaustive record-keeping. In this instance, both plaintiffs had meticulously maintained detailed records of the threats and intimidation they endured, primarily through social media and phone calls. These records served as compelling evidence supporting their claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress.
The severity of these threats forced the plaintiffs to make drastic life changes – they had to change their homes, quit their jobs, and leave their hometowns. The jury considered all these factors when determining the damages.
Impact of Media
When it came to the defamation charges, the plaintiffs demonstrated the power of thorough documentation once again. They had compiled records of all the media and news reports, as well as social media posts, that defamed them and tarnished their reputation in the community. This collection of evidence played a pivotal role in substantiating their defamation claim.
The Value of Expert Testimony
To assign a monetary value to the impact of this defamation on their lives, the plaintiffs sought the help of a social media expert. After careful analysis, the expert determined that it would take $16 million to rehabilitate their reputations and counteract the negative news posts, social media comments, and other detrimental commentary.
Defamation Cases are Unique
From my perspective, damages in defamation and intentional infliction cases significantly differ from those in personal injury cases. In the latter, concrete costs like medical bills can serve as clear indicators of the financial impact. However, defamation cases lack such tangible metrics, making the calculation of damages a more intricate process.
This complexity underscores the importance of having a competent defamation lawyer who can effectively articulate to the jury how these damages should be calculated. As I always say, having the right lawyer to guide you through these steps is crucial to your case.
In conclusion, the Rudy Giuliani case underscores the importance of record-keeping, expert testimony, and skilled legal representation in defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress cases. I hope my insights have helped shed light on the often-obscure process of calculating damages in such lawsuits.