Kemo
11-13-2015, 04:57 AM
Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit against Gawker is the pro wrestling news story with the most wide-reaching “real world” consequences, and rolls on next week with a hearing on Wednesday, November 18th. An amended notice about the hearing went up today, and it outlines which topics will be covered, time permitting, over the course of the hearing. All of the matters mentioned in the notice were raised by Hogan’s side, and they include:
1. Hogan’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs on discovery rulings:
This was covered in detail here at SEScoops about two weeks ago. The short version is that Hogan’s side is accusing Gawker of violating the rules of discovery (the process that includes document production, deposition testimony, and so on) in bad faith. This would put them on the hook for Hogan’s fees in the discovery issues where he had to fight them in court, which total $427,665. Most of that comes from attorney’s fees with less than 10% being from court costs. Hogan accused Gawker, of, among other things, making it difficult to secure some depositions and doing things designed to drag him into court so often that he’d drop the case for financial reasons.
2. Hogan’s motion to compel complete production of documents in response to financial worth discovery, reconsideration of a related ruling, and a request for sanctions:
This sort of ties into #1. Hogan has won previous motions for additional financial information from Gawker, and Gawker has refused to produce some documents. Specifically, Gawker hasn’t provided Hogan with a “Transfer Pricing Study” that shows exactly what Gawker pays Hungarian sister company Kinja. Last year, one of Hogan’s discovery requests specifically asked for the study, but Gawker said the only versions that existed were confidential, covered under attorney/client privilege. Hogan is moving for sanctions against Gawker because a privilege log (filing that outlines what the other side can’t see due to attorney/client privilege) as an “economic analysis” instead of a “transfer pricing study.” Gawker insists it’s still privileged, Hogan’s side argues it’s not.
Similarly, Gawker founder Nick Denton is saying he does not have records of his family’s trust, which the court ordered him to produce. Hogan’s side is saying that’s ridiculous. So this all comes down to whether or not Gawker is acting above board.
3. Hogan’s motion to determine the confidentiality of court records, specifically an affidavit filed by Charles J. Harder (one of his lawyers):
Like #2 tying into #1, #3 ties into #2, because the affidavit is in support of the financial worth discovery motion. It looks like Hogan wants Gawker’s information out there.
Those will all be covered for sure on Wednesday. The following are listed as being dealt with “time permitting,” so they may be held off for a later hearing…
4. Hogan’s motion to strike Gawker’s affirmative defenses:
Gawker’s most recent answer to Hogan’s most recent amended complaint includes two “affirmative defenses,” which are that Hogan is:
* Committing a fraud upon the court.
* Violating recent Florida’s statutes that bar Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP, or essentially a lawsuit filed solely to censor a legal exercise of free speech).
Hogan’s side, of course, is arguing that the case can’t be a SLAPP, because the heart of the matter is Gawker publishing clips of Hogan having sex that were shot in private without his knowledge or consent. As for the vase being a “fraud upon the court,” Hogan’s side argues it’s not an affirmative defense. Cornell’s legal dictionary defines an affirmative defense as “a defense in which the defendant introduces evidence, which, if found to be credible, will negate criminal or civil liability, even if it is proven that the defendant committed the alleged acts.”
5. Hogan’s stipulation and motion to amend/modify 10/27/15 order on motions to determine confidentiality:
Both Gawker and various outside media companies have filed motions this year to get various sealed filings unsealed with the idea that Florida’s public records laws were being violated. This applies to not just the FBI records from their investigation into Hogan being extorted with the sex tapes, but all sorts of other exhibits and motions. They range from financial information to a magazine photo spread of him with naked women with who knows what else in between. Hogan is willing to let some of the exhibits be unsealed as long as the filings they’re supporting are left sealed, and his side’s suggestions will be considered.
That’s a lot to cover, so if they don’t have time to cover #4 and #5 this will bleed into a second hearing. Some past hearings have streamed live on Florida TV station websites, so keep an eye out and we’ll let you know if this one is streamed, but either way we’ll keep you updated.
1. Hogan’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs on discovery rulings:
This was covered in detail here at SEScoops about two weeks ago. The short version is that Hogan’s side is accusing Gawker of violating the rules of discovery (the process that includes document production, deposition testimony, and so on) in bad faith. This would put them on the hook for Hogan’s fees in the discovery issues where he had to fight them in court, which total $427,665. Most of that comes from attorney’s fees with less than 10% being from court costs. Hogan accused Gawker, of, among other things, making it difficult to secure some depositions and doing things designed to drag him into court so often that he’d drop the case for financial reasons.
2. Hogan’s motion to compel complete production of documents in response to financial worth discovery, reconsideration of a related ruling, and a request for sanctions:
This sort of ties into #1. Hogan has won previous motions for additional financial information from Gawker, and Gawker has refused to produce some documents. Specifically, Gawker hasn’t provided Hogan with a “Transfer Pricing Study” that shows exactly what Gawker pays Hungarian sister company Kinja. Last year, one of Hogan’s discovery requests specifically asked for the study, but Gawker said the only versions that existed were confidential, covered under attorney/client privilege. Hogan is moving for sanctions against Gawker because a privilege log (filing that outlines what the other side can’t see due to attorney/client privilege) as an “economic analysis” instead of a “transfer pricing study.” Gawker insists it’s still privileged, Hogan’s side argues it’s not.
Similarly, Gawker founder Nick Denton is saying he does not have records of his family’s trust, which the court ordered him to produce. Hogan’s side is saying that’s ridiculous. So this all comes down to whether or not Gawker is acting above board.
3. Hogan’s motion to determine the confidentiality of court records, specifically an affidavit filed by Charles J. Harder (one of his lawyers):
Like #2 tying into #1, #3 ties into #2, because the affidavit is in support of the financial worth discovery motion. It looks like Hogan wants Gawker’s information out there.
Those will all be covered for sure on Wednesday. The following are listed as being dealt with “time permitting,” so they may be held off for a later hearing…
4. Hogan’s motion to strike Gawker’s affirmative defenses:
Gawker’s most recent answer to Hogan’s most recent amended complaint includes two “affirmative defenses,” which are that Hogan is:
* Committing a fraud upon the court.
* Violating recent Florida’s statutes that bar Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPP, or essentially a lawsuit filed solely to censor a legal exercise of free speech).
Hogan’s side, of course, is arguing that the case can’t be a SLAPP, because the heart of the matter is Gawker publishing clips of Hogan having sex that were shot in private without his knowledge or consent. As for the vase being a “fraud upon the court,” Hogan’s side argues it’s not an affirmative defense. Cornell’s legal dictionary defines an affirmative defense as “a defense in which the defendant introduces evidence, which, if found to be credible, will negate criminal or civil liability, even if it is proven that the defendant committed the alleged acts.”
5. Hogan’s stipulation and motion to amend/modify 10/27/15 order on motions to determine confidentiality:
Both Gawker and various outside media companies have filed motions this year to get various sealed filings unsealed with the idea that Florida’s public records laws were being violated. This applies to not just the FBI records from their investigation into Hogan being extorted with the sex tapes, but all sorts of other exhibits and motions. They range from financial information to a magazine photo spread of him with naked women with who knows what else in between. Hogan is willing to let some of the exhibits be unsealed as long as the filings they’re supporting are left sealed, and his side’s suggestions will be considered.
That’s a lot to cover, so if they don’t have time to cover #4 and #5 this will bleed into a second hearing. Some past hearings have streamed live on Florida TV station websites, so keep an eye out and we’ll let you know if this one is streamed, but either way we’ll keep you updated.