Palin jury learned of Judge's motion to dismiss case against NYT before giving verdict
By Dominick Mastrangelo - 02/16/22 01:43 PM EST
Several of the jurors who ruled against former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) in her civil case against The New York Times learned of a judge's decision to dismiss the case before handing down their verdict.
"These jurors reported that although they had been assiduously adhering to the Court’s instruction to avoid media coverage of the trial, they had involuntarily received “push notifications” on their smartphones that contained the bottomline of the ruling," a filing in U.S. District Court submitted on Wednesday read.
"The jurors repeatedly assured the Court’s law clerk that these notifications had not affected them in any way or played any role whatever in their deliberations."
On Monday, Judge Jed Rakoff indicated he would dismiss the libel case, which stems from an editorial the Times published in 2011 incorrectly linking Palin to a mass shooting in an Arizona parking lot where then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) was shot and seriously wounded.
After the judge's move, several outlet sent the news out via push alerts — a short message often sent in breaking news situations directly from a news organization to a person's cell phone or tablet or other subscribed personal device alerting them to a story.
more
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/594555-palin-jury-learned-of-judges-motion-to-dismiss-case-against-nyt-before-giving
That may be treated as harmless error, on the basis that even if the jurors had returned a verdict for Ms. Palin, the judge would still have issued a ruling dismissing the case.
However, things get tricky if it turns out that she would have appealed the judge's decision to dismiss, because on the current footing, since the judge hasn't issued an order and opinion dismissing the case, she couldn't challenge that decision at this point in time.
So, what is likely to happen is that she will appeal from the verdict on the basis of a tainted jury, and the Court of Appeals will either (a) consider de novo the ground on which the judge was going to dismiss the case - if it is merely a matter of law, and not a matter of fact-finding, an appeals court can usually hear argument de novo on the point of law and make a decision on that point - which could either result in overturning the verdict and returning the case for a new trial, or a finding of harmless error, or (b) overturn the verdict and simply return the case to the trial court for further proceedings, at which point the trial judge could issue his decision and opinion dismissing the case, and Ms. Palin would then have to appeal that decision.
It's always more complicated than it seems at first.
