comm207fall06

Here's the nice thing about studying communications: The stuff in the textbooks is matched by what goes on in the real world. Take this story, for example. It's about a libel suit in Kane County Circuit Court, in the far western suburbs of Chicago, and it appeared in today's Chicago Trib. It's a perfect example of how libel suits play out.

An update: This afternoon (Tue.), long after the Trib went to press, the jury returned a verdict. The columnist who was the defendant in the case was guilty of libel, and the judge who was the plaintiff was awared $7 million in damages.

Here's the nut graf(s) in this morning's Trib:

There is no question that the words former Kane County Chronicle columnist Bill Page wrote in two columns in 2003 accusing Chief Justice Robert Thomas of injecting politics into a case pending before the high court were defamatory. The defense conceded as much.

Jurors, who got the case around 4 p.m., began considering whether Page and the Kane County Chronicle knew the columns were false or showed a reckless disregard for the truth and, if so, whether Thomas, 54, a former Chicago Bears placekicker, suffered personally and professionally as a result.

See how it works? To be found guilty of libel, it has to be shown you acted unlawfully and the plaintiff suffered damage that a jury can put a cash value on.

Here's how lawyers for the two argued the issues at stake. Note how Thomas' lawyer focuses on money issues:

In closing arguments, attorney Joseph Power said Page made up allegations that Thomas threatened to severely punish, and possibly disbar, the former Kane County state's attorney in a disciplinary case unless local Republican leaders agreed to support his nominee for a local judgeship in an upcoming election. Power noted that neither Page nor the Kane County Chronicle produced witnesses that could testify that Thomas made such a threat.

Power said the columns hurt Thomas' reputation and could hurt his ability to get a high-paying job with a prestigious law firm when his Supreme Court term is up in eight years.

"The allegations go to the heart of what a judge is, and that's integrity," Power told jurors.

He asked that Thomas be awarded as much as $17.4 million in damages: $7.7 million in lost potential income, another $7.7 million for damage to his reputation, and up to $2 million compensation for the public humiliation he argued Thomas has suffered.

Defense attorney Stephen Rosenfeld argued the jury's decision could have ramifications far beyond the dispute between Thomas and the newspaper. Rosenfeld told jurors they were being asked to rein in 1st Amendment freedoms that founding fathers granted to newspapers and to the press.

In the end, the jury agreed with the plaintiff. It may come as a disappointment to political columnists and other guardians of First Amendment liberties but it shouldn't come as a surprise ... especially to courthouse reporters and others who are familiar with the courts. Defamation law, at bottom, is about protecting people's ability to make money.