For Immediate Release
Libel Resource Defense Center, Inc.
Phone: 212/889-2306
www.ldrc.com

NEW YORK, N.Y. February 26, 2001—

There were fewer trials on libel, privacy and related claims against the media in 2000 than in the past several years, and media defendants won a greater percentage of cases than in previous years, according to the 2001 Report on Trials and Damages, released today by the Libel Defense Resource Center (LDRC), an information clearinghouse which monitors trends in media libel, privacy and related law. But the average and median damage awards against the media in 2000 were among the highest in the 21-year history of the Report.

There were only 11 trials against the media on libel, privacy and related claims in 2000, reflecting a long-term downward trend in the number of trials over the last two decades. While the number of trials each year varied throughout the 1990s, the overall average for the decade was 17.9 trials a year.

In the 1980s, the average was 26.1 trials a year. Media defendants won 46 percent of the trials in 2000 (five of 11), up from a third of the 12 trials in 1999 and above the win rates for the 1990s (38 percent) and 1980s (35 percent).

The average award in the six trials won by plaintiffs in 2000 was $5.6 million, one of the highest annual totals in the 21-year period studied by LDRC. The median award for 2000 – $2.5 million – is the highest since the LDRC began studying these trends. But LDRC suggests caution in trying to place too much meaning in the damage results from only six awards.

These high figures are in part attributable to the $24.5 million award in the Missouri state court case of Doe v. TCI Cablevision, a misappropriation invasion of privacy claim. The award has already been set aside by the trial court, which granted judgment for the defendants after the trial, a decision that is currently on appeal. Post-trial motions or appeals by media defendants are pending in four other cases that the media lost at trial, and one such case was settled after a new trial was ordered.

The plaintiff has filed a post-trial motion in one of the five cases in 2000 that was won by the media defendants at trial. Post-trial motions seek reversals of verdicts at trial, reductions or dismissal of damage awards, and/or new trials.

Punitive damages awards in 2000 were at a record low, making up less than four percent of the total damages awarded. Punitive damages were over sixty percent of total damages in both the decades of the 1990s and the 1980s. Whether 2000 suggests a downward trend in punitive damage awards for the next decade or is simply an anomaly will have to await the results of the next few years.

The LDRC report also shows the success that media defendants have on appeal. During the 21 years covered by the Report, defendants successfully reduced awards in more than two-thirds of the cases that they appealed. In these successful appeals, the total of final awards appeal was 95 percent less than the total of the amounts initially awarded after trial.

Despite this success on appeal, the rate at which media defendants appeal verdicts against them is declining. Twice as many cases went without appeals in the 1990s as in the 1980s, and cases were far more likely to be settled post-trial in the 1990s than in the 1980s.

"The media, as it enters the new Millennium, continues to go to trial on libel, privacy and related First Amendment issues less frequently than in the 1980s and to win a higher percentage of those trials," said Sandra S. Baron, executive director of LDRC. "We believe this suggests a continuation of the trends seen in the 1990s when media defendants experienced greater success at trial both before juries and judges."

"We do not see the high damage awards in 2000 as necessarily foreshadowing difficult times in this new decade, but we will be taking a close look at damage awards over the next few years. Because no one can seriously deny that the extensive litigation of trials and subsequent appeals, and high damage awards, throw a chill over free speech, the ability of media to win at trial, win on appeal, and keep ultimate damages low is in the long term interest of free speech and press in this country. "

The LDRC Report contains descriptions of all of the cases tried in 2000 and updates the outcomes of cases tried in earlier years. In tables, figures and written analysis, the Report presents a complete picture of media trials held over the last 21 years. The Report is available from the LDRC for $25 by calling (212) 889-2306.

The Report includes trials in which a judge or jury reached a liability verdict; it does not include cases with hung juries, cases settled before verdict or cases in which defendants defaulted.

The Libel Defense Resource Center is a non-profit information clearinghouse organized in 1980 by leading media groups to monitor developments and promote First Amendment rights in the libel, privacy and related fields. LDRC has systematically monitored trends in libel and privacy trials and appeals since 1980, and its empirical data have been widely cited and reported in the media, in scholarly publications and in judicial opinions. LDRC’s studies have thus played a central role in the ongoing debate over the effect of libel claims on freedom of the press.

LDRC’s members include leading publishers and broadcasters, media and professional trade associations representing newspaper, magazine, newsletter and book publishers, broadcasters, journalists, authors, news directors and newspaper editors, and also media insurance carriers. LDRC’s law firm wing, the LDRC Defense Counsel Section, consists of nearly 200 member firms around the country and abroad with specialities in media and libel defense representation.

For more information about LDRC or to order the LDRC 2001 Report on Trials and Damages please contact LDRC, 404 Park Avenue South, 16th Floor, New York, NY 10016, by phone 212.889.2306, or via our web site www.ldrc.com.