4 ms·
I don't get it. The jury found that Hoff's statements on the blog were "not untrue", but he's guilty of "tortious interference". Could someone with a better und
by pdubs 14y ago
I don't get it. The jury found that Hoff's statements on the blog were "not untrue", but he's guilty of "tortious interference". Could someone with a better understanding of civil law clarify how exactly that works?
- tokenadult 14y agoThe best-considered view is that the trial court muffed up. Truth is well known to be a defense against a defamation claim, but because the lawyers for Jerry Moore made a claim of tortious interference with Moore's employment, the trial court judge got confused, perhaps with assistance from lawyers who argued the case poorly on both sides, and still allowed a verdict of liability and a LARGE damage award. Most observers here in Minnesota with legal training have been expecting this odd trial court result to be reversed on appeal. Now the appeal is in process.