Faulk v. Aware, Inc. case brief summary
231 N.Y.S.2d 270 (Sup. Ct. 1962)
CASE FACTS
A radio and television performer filed a libel suit against a corporation, a consultant, and a third individual who died prior to the verdict. The performer contended that defendants had caused him to be blacklisted in the radio and television industry for alleged ties to the communist party and argued that the direct cause for his failure to obtain employment was the result of defendants' libel and acts.
DISCUSSION
The court denied the corporation and consultant's motion to set aside a jury verdict awarding substantial compensatory damages and punitive damages against the corporation and consultant on a television performer's libel action. The court concluded that there was substantial evidence in the record to support the jury awards.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law
231 N.Y.S.2d 270 (Sup. Ct. 1962)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant corporation and
consultant filed a motion to set aside a jury verdict awarding
compensatory damages of one million against defendants and a third
individual defendant, now deceased, and punitive damages of $
1,250,000 against the corporation and consultant on plaintiff
television performer's libel action.CASE FACTS
A radio and television performer filed a libel suit against a corporation, a consultant, and a third individual who died prior to the verdict. The performer contended that defendants had caused him to be blacklisted in the radio and television industry for alleged ties to the communist party and argued that the direct cause for his failure to obtain employment was the result of defendants' libel and acts.
DISCUSSION
- The court denied defendants' motion to set aside a jury verdict awarding compensation damages of one million against all three defendants and punitive damages of $ 1,250,000 against the corporation and consultant.
- The court held that expert testimony as to the performer's earning capacity and testimony regarding the performer's achievements and abilities was admissible and the jury had the right to consider such testimony in fixing compensatory damages.
- The court held that the verdict was not excessive and found substantial evidence to support the award.
- The court also found substantial evidence to support the punitive damages award since the jury could find malice and intent to injury the performer pursuant to a concerted plan prepared to end the performer's broadcasting career.
The court denied the corporation and consultant's motion to set aside a jury verdict awarding substantial compensatory damages and punitive damages against the corporation and consultant on a television performer's libel action. The court concluded that there was substantial evidence in the record to support the jury awards.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law
No comments:
Post a Comment