She's requesting the default judgement? And she's the one being sued? Did she already file this? Because I think that's not good. Like I'm pretty sure that is actively bad. Rudy lost his defamation case by default.
A default judgement means you're not defending any of the charges....the same as or close to admitting the charges. Normally the person suing would request this against the defendant.
My understanding is that she is not contesting that she said what she said, and that it was defamatory.
Instead, she is going straight to disputing the amount of damages. If she had fought the case, and lost, the next step would have been a hearing to determine actual damages.
So, she is bypassing the trial, which would determine if she was guilty of defamation, and instead is going straight to the hearing to determine the damages, if any. She has requested a jury to determine damages owed (if any).
She wants the plaintiff's medical and psychological records to prove that he actually suffered real damages, and is not simply making it up for the purpose of legal harassment.
If she had gone through a trial of the facts, she would have had to show that the statements she made were actually true (truth is the defense against a defamation charge), which would have been impossible to do, because evidence of the election fraud she alleges has been controlled by her adversaries, and she cannot access the information.
Plus, she has bigger fish to fry in running for office.
So, while odd, it is probably a good move, given the circumstances.
I gotta think this is a giant gamble. Especially given what happened with Giuliani.
My understanding is that she is not contesting that she said what she said, and that it was defamatory.
Yeah, she is admitting defamation
instead is going straight to the hearing to determine the damages, if any.
This is the gamble. If you defame someone, you are going to pay damages almost assuredly.
because evidence of the election fraud she alleges has been controlled by her adversaries, and she cannot access the information.
But she would be entitled to discovery. She must have made specific claims and not just given a general opinion. She would be able to subpoena documents and emails and any other records.
The elements necessary to winning a defamation case are:
1. A statement of fact was made, and it was made to someone else (Kari admits this)
2. The statement was false (Kari does not admit this, it is now the plaintiff's burden to prove that the statements were false)
3. Kari was negligent or acted with absolute malice in determining the truth of the statement (Kari denies this so again the plaintiff would need to prove this)
4. The statement caused some demonstrable damage (Kari also denies this, so again the plaintiff will have to prove it)
There is no way the plaintiff gets a directed verdict here.
AND YOU win the Internet for the day...I always thought that IF someone brought a DEFAMATION SUITE against another party, they party bringing the suite MUST show the damage...At least until I saw you EXCELLENTE' screed...
So she definitely filed a motion for a default judgement and the judge has responded.
The judge doesn't seem to agree with the interpretation above. I read this as she as given up all her defenses.
Defendants have now consented to the entry of a default judgment. In doing so, Defendants effectively concede that they do not intend “to plead or otherwise defend” the case as provided by our rules of procedure. See Rule 55(a)(1), Arizona
Rules of Civil Procedure
There's a footnote that says
It's worth noting that – pursuant to well-established Arizona law – a defaulted party loses all rights to litigate the merits of the cause of action. The defaulted party may appear in the action solely for the purpose of litigating the issue of damages
What's happened to her lawsuits for AZ Governor?? How was she robbed like that still when they then even perjured themselves on camera in the middle of the courtroom??
"Lake’s attorneys have requested a default judgment, meaning Richer’s attorneys now have to provide evidence of his damage from Kari’s words."
She's requesting the default judgement? And she's the one being sued? Did she already file this? Because I think that's not good. Like I'm pretty sure that is actively bad. Rudy lost his defamation case by default.
A default judgement means you're not defending any of the charges....the same as or close to admitting the charges. Normally the person suing would request this against the defendant.
Anyone know why she would do this?
My understanding is that she is not contesting that she said what she said, and that it was defamatory.
Instead, she is going straight to disputing the amount of damages. If she had fought the case, and lost, the next step would have been a hearing to determine actual damages.
So, she is bypassing the trial, which would determine if she was guilty of defamation, and instead is going straight to the hearing to determine the damages, if any. She has requested a jury to determine damages owed (if any).
She wants the plaintiff's medical and psychological records to prove that he actually suffered real damages, and is not simply making it up for the purpose of legal harassment.
If she had gone through a trial of the facts, she would have had to show that the statements she made were actually true (truth is the defense against a defamation charge), which would have been impossible to do, because evidence of the election fraud she alleges has been controlled by her adversaries, and she cannot access the information.
Plus, she has bigger fish to fry in running for office.
So, while odd, it is probably a good move, given the circumstances.
Great summation, u/MAG768720 . Here she is on Bannon's War Room. https://rumble.com/v4m2sd2-kari-lake-explains-az-dems-latest-defamation-lawfare-attack-to-distract-her.html
I gotta think this is a giant gamble. Especially given what happened with Giuliani.
Yeah, she is admitting defamation
This is the gamble. If you defame someone, you are going to pay damages almost assuredly.
But she would be entitled to discovery. She must have made specific claims and not just given a general opinion. She would be able to subpoena documents and emails and any other records.
The elements necessary to winning a defamation case are:
There is no way the plaintiff gets a directed verdict here.
AND YOU win the Internet for the day...I always thought that IF someone brought a DEFAMATION SUITE against another party, they party bringing the suite MUST show the damage...At least until I saw you EXCELLENTE' screed...
Outstanding!! Muchos/Muchas Gracias!!!!!!!!!!😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷🍷
So she definitely filed a motion for a default judgement and the judge has responded.
The judge doesn't seem to agree with the interpretation above. I read this as she as given up all her defenses.
There's a footnote that says
Here is the ruling. https://courtminutes.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/viewerME.asp?fn=Civil/032024/m10811078.pdf
Obviously Kari, the truth hurts.
What's happened to her lawsuits for AZ Governor?? How was she robbed like that still when they then even perjured themselves on camera in the middle of the courtroom??