As noted, the court dismissed the case:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/29/b...s.html?mcubz=0
As I noted early on in this thread, Ms. Palin, as a 'public figure', had a very high hurdle to overcome, namely, to show 'actual malice' (or, 'reckless disregard') on the part of the newspaper/journalist.
Dismissals are a common tool used by the courts in such matters. Ms. Palin's was a 'high profile' case, but newspapers are continually being sued by someone for defamation. It would be the height of judicial abuse to demand that every person that files a lawsuit must have their day in court. Many agree that nuisance suits should be dismissed outright.
Ms. Palin's case was not summarily dismissed, as so many are if the court finds that the plaintiff failed to make a 'prima facie' case to meet such standard. Rather, this court did hold an evidentiary hearing at which the author testified.
The court wrote: "Negligence this may be; but defamation of a public figure it plainly is not."
Ms. Palin may, if she desires, appeal the dismissal. I would advise against it.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
