![]() Campbell has obviously received a great deal of publicity from this Hogan case.īefore trial, Judge Campbell was asked to make all sorts of rulings - including determining what evidence was irrelevant and potentially prejudicial. Studies show that elections can shape decisions made from the bench. In the middle of the Hogan litigation, she was re-elected to a six-year term in 2014. It’s also possibly significant that circuit judges in Florida go through elections. Jeb Bush after proving her conservative bona fides by representing the parents of Terri Schiavo in a end-of-life case that received national attention. Why this became important is that it allowed Hogan to fight with a home-field advantage, before a judge, the Pinellas Circuit’s Pamela Campbell, who was appointed to the bench in 2006 by Gov. ![]() And so the case was remanded back to a state court. But the judge there noted the presence as a co-defendant of Heather Cole (formerly Clem) - Hogan’s sex partner in the tape - and decided that diversity jurisdiction (and thus a federal court) didn’t apply. Gawker then had the case removed back to federal court. He refiled in state court without the federal copyright claim. Hogan then switched tactics, making the case more about privacy than property. The federal judge, when asked to rule on a temporary restraining order against Gawker, presaged Hogan’s uphill battle with word that the publishing of the video excerpt was “in conjunction with the news reporting function” and that the “factual finding supports a colorable fair use defense.” Thanks to Hogan’s settlement agreement with Bubba the Love Sponge, the plaintiff was conferred rights to the sex tape in question. When Hogan first sued, he did so in federal court by attaching a copyright claim. While the verdict itself is of limited legal precedent, the nearly forgotten story of how - and where - it got to trial in the first place provides some. When celebrities and others do sue, the Hogan case may provide another signal of what’s to come. “Will it lead to similar cases? The answer is probably yes.” “When you see a number like $115 million, sure, it can’t help but be an optimistic sign for plaintiffs,” Freeman tells THR. Will news of Hogan’s victory embolden potential plaintiffs? For example, just a month ago, NFL superstar Jason Pierre-Paul filed an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit in a Florida court against ESPN and its reporter Adam Schefter after a photo of his medical records was tweeted out to 4 million followers. During the Hogan trial, a Gawker editor was asked about attitudes on “revenge porn.” But the tough issues surely go beyond nudity and sex. In the digital age, with drones in the sky and biometric-collecting devices on the ground, the issue of ensuring privacy for citizens will surely cause lawmakers and courts to grapple with the boundaries of free speech. Then again, as evidenced by the Sony hack, news organizations confront all types of objections on privacy grounds. The Hogan case is also, in the words of George Freeman, the executive director of the Media Law Resource Center, one that addresses “an unusual and extremely private matter.” That is, a sex tape. ![]() Many First Amendment scholars will point out that this was merely a trial verdict, one that might not survive Gawker‘s promised appellate review. Should the press now be concerned about what went down in a Florida courtroom at Hulk Hogan’s trial? Vopper (the right to broadcast illegally recorded communications), media outlets have operated with an air of confidence on materials determined to be in the public interest. United States (the right to publish classified information) and Bartnicki v. Sullivan (concerning libel of public figures), New York Times v. For decades, thanks to favorable legal decisions such as New York Times v. Ta-Nehisi Coates and the Future of SupermanĪ Florida jury’s $115 million verdict against Gawker on Friday - and $25 million more in punitive damages today - compels an examination into what sort of precedent this sets. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |