We don't know the terms of any of these settlements.
It's possible the meeting happened. It's also possible it didn't. Where does that put matters in terms of a defamation suit? Plaintiff has to prove malice.
The DUI Coomer video doesn't indicate mad $$$ are coming in. Who is working all these cases for him? Most lawyers won't even have a conversation unless you have ten grand floating around.
we conclude that Coomer has met his burden of establishing a reasonable likelihood that he will be able to prove
actual malice by clear and convincing evidence.
This is why I think when someone settles after this ruling, the settlement is favorable to Coomer.
Also
On page 68 they discuss "Falsity."
They mention this
(2) Oltmann originally said it was
a phone call but later said it was a Zoom call;
The rhetoric from the judges is definitely in Coomer's favor in every instance that I saw, to the point that they sound as though they're arguing on his behalf rather than judging.
But if true, why isn't Coomer blinging it up and hitting the victory circuit like E. Jean? Instead he's doing kitchen work and keeping a very low profile.
But if true, why isn't Coomer blinging it up and hitting the victory circuit like E. Jean?
Two possibilities pop into my head.
He doesn't want to. Either no interest in being a public figure or doesn't want to affect the ongoing cases.
He can't. Lots of settlements require silence. Basically it will be something like we will pay more $$$ only on certain conditions.
I think this is more likely.
E. Jean did not settle. She went to trial and won, so she has no restrictions about speaking out.
The rhetoric from the judges is definitely in Coomer's favor in every instance that I saw, to the point that they sound as though they're arguing on his behalf rather than judging.
Well the case has been going on for a while. A lot of sworn evidence has been submitted. This and the fact that several folks have settled leave me ro believe he has a strong case.
Coomer has declared he never participated in any such call. He supplied things like his schedule to support this.
The documents say there was a call by Denver activists in September that might be the call in question, but the timing isn't an exact match, and one participant said it was not an antifa call and Eric Coomer was not on it and he doesn't know Eric Coomer. So that's what the judges are responding to.
We don't know the terms of any of these settlements.
It's possible the meeting happened. It's also possible it didn't. Where does that put matters in terms of a defamation suit? Plaintiff has to prove malice.
The DUI Coomer video doesn't indicate mad $$$ are coming in. Who is working all these cases for him? Most lawyers won't even have a conversation unless you have ten grand floating around.
In April, the appeals court let the case go forward.
https://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_of_Appeals/Opinion/2024/22CA0843-PD.pdf On page 81 they say
This is why I think when someone settles after this ruling, the settlement is favorable to Coomer.
Also On page 68 they discuss "Falsity." They mention this (2) Oltmann originally said it was a phone call but later said it was a Zoom call;
The rhetoric from the judges is definitely in Coomer's favor in every instance that I saw, to the point that they sound as though they're arguing on his behalf rather than judging.
But if true, why isn't Coomer blinging it up and hitting the victory circuit like E. Jean? Instead he's doing kitchen work and keeping a very low profile.
Two possibilities pop into my head.
He doesn't want to. Either no interest in being a public figure or doesn't want to affect the ongoing cases.
He can't. Lots of settlements require silence. Basically it will be something like we will pay more $$$ only on certain conditions.
I think this is more likely.
E. Jean did not settle. She went to trial and won, so she has no restrictions about speaking out.
Well the case has been going on for a while. A lot of sworn evidence has been submitted. This and the fact that several folks have settled leave me ro believe he has a strong case.
Coomer has declared he never participated in any such call. He supplied things like his schedule to support this.
The documents say there was a call by Denver activists in September that might be the call in question, but the timing isn't an exact match, and one participant said it was not an antifa call and Eric Coomer was not on it and he doesn't know Eric Coomer. So that's what the judges are responding to.