Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Jury Awards Astonishing $11.3 Million Dollar Reward in Internet Defamation Suit, But What Message is Really Sent?
In what appears to be the "largest judgment over postings on an Internet blog or message board," a Florida woman, Sue Scheff, has been awarded "$11.3 million in a defamation lawsuit against a Louisiana woman who posted messages on the Internet accusing her of being a 'crook,' a 'con artist' and a 'fraud.'" Framing the suit and outcome in this manner shocks the mind and perhaps may make those typing fingers slightly more hesitant and reluctant to let it all out next time they post, but this wasn't exactly a normal lawsuit procedurally.
The defendant upon which judgment was entered upon for the $11.3 million, Carey Bock of Mandeville, LA, wasn't even at the trial as she could no longer afford the attorney she originally hired and claims she didn't even know the court dates.
When Katrina hit in August 2005, Bock's house was flooded and she moved temporarily to Texas before returning to Louisiana last June. Court papers that Scheff and her attorney David H. Pollack mailed to Bock were returned to Pollack's office in Miami.
After Bock didn't offer a defense, a Broward Circuit Court judge found in favor of Scheff. A jury then heard Scheff's arguments about damages. Pollack did not seek a specific amount for the harm he says Scheff's business suffered.
So, the jury didn't even get to decide Bock's guilt as judgment was entered against Bock based upon her non-appearance and all that was left for the jury to decide was a one-sided argument about damages. We can't be sure the jury would have found Bock guilty in the first place nor can we be sure they would have awarded such a quintessentially appealable amount of damages had she appeared to defend herself. Juries are supposed to be a group of impartial citizens who happen to possess sympathy. The defendant is a Hurricane Katrina victim. I don't think this jury award is anything to be utterly worried about and is not indicative of sentiment when it comes to defamation via blog, message board, etc. However, I would agree that the blogosphere is still a small world with little empathy floating around amongst potential jury pools and may play a factor in future cases, but I don't think it's fair to say it played a factor here since the blogosphere was not present to defend itself.
