UPDATED with clarification from Fox News, comparative amounts and comments from Dominion’s CEO: Fox News has settled Dominion Voting Systems’ $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch’s organization, avoiding a long, expensive and certainly embarrassing case.
“The parties have resolved their case,” Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric M. Davis said in court Tuesday afternoon, without giving details. News of the settlement was strategically released just before Wall Street suspended trading for the day.
Fox paid Dominion $787.5 million as part of the deal, the company’s lawyers later said in court. “Fox has admitted to lying about Dominion, which has caused tremendous harm to my business, our employees and the customers we serve,” said Dominion CEO John Poulos. “It can’t make up for anything.”
Fox News is under no obligation to issue an apology or retraction, sources said. However, Fox was quick to respond to the settlement in made-up language that seemed to gently play back on claims, reinforced by hosts and guests, that the 2020 election was stolen from incumbent Donald Trump.
“We are pleased to have settled our dispute with Dominion Voting Systems,” a Fox spokesman said after announcing the settlement. “We acknowledge the court’s rulings that found certain allegations about Dominion to be false. This agreement reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest standards of journalism. We hope that our decision to resolve this dispute amicably with Dominion, rather than the acrimony of a divisive process, will allow the country to move forward with these issues.”
After a flurry of post-dinner activity in and out of Judge Davis’ chambers, the settlement comes shortly after the 12-member jury was seated and appointed a special master to investigate Fox’s compliance. The opening speech was supposed to start later in the day, but that plan went awry when viewers sat in the courtroom for nearly two hours with no idea what was going on.
While a settlement is nothing new for companies owned by Fox and Murdoch, things looked set to escalate into the wee hours of the morning in a six-week process. Given the flurry of sharp and hypocritical internal correspondence that has surfaced in recent weeks between executives and Fox anchors such as Sean Hannity, Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham about Trump and his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, the company seems eager to ‘ strike a deal with private equity-backed Dominion and bar the 92-year-old Murdoch from testifying.
A hint of that seemed to be on the horizon for the past 48 hours.
On Sunday night, just over 12 hours before the jury was to be selected and seated, Judge Davis abruptly postponed the start of the trial until Tuesday. The move immediately sparked speculation that both sides were involved in some sort of meeting to reach a resolution. Talks were said to be ongoing over the weekend, but the situation remained “fluid”, according to a well-placed legal source.
On Monday morning, the judge publicly repeated his statement from the previous evening: “I have made the decision to postpone the start of the trial until tomorrow. With only one attorney from each side present, the judge gave no reason for the delay in an otherwise packed Wilmington courtroom and media room, but said such incidents were not “unusual” in such proceedings.
The high-profile hearing likely would have resulted in a number of Fox executives, including the elder Murdoch and councilman and former House Speaker Paul Ryan, taking the witness stand for live testimony. In addition, some of the network’s most famous and controversial hosts, including Carlson, Hannity and Maria Bartiromo, were on Dominion’s witness list, as was Fox boss Lachlan Murdoch.
In an apparently scathing portrayal of Murdoch’s own conservative position, Dominion’s lawyers planned to offer emails and text messages showing that the Murdochs, other top Fox vests and news personalities personally doubted Trump’s claims that the 2020 election fraud. , but still airing the claims of hosts and guests. Much of this correspondence has already surfaced in files and pre-trial hearings; They were ignored on air by Fox and left a distinct stench in the public eye.
Davis ruled in late March that the case could go to trial, dismissing one of Fox’s claims that the network only handled newsworthy allegations of presidential election fraud. He found the allegations about Dominion on the air to be false and left it up to the jury to decide whether the network was responsible for any actual malice. He also left it up to the jury to determine whether Fox Corp. and not only Fox News was liable.
The Delaware judge also said he plans to appoint a special judge to investigate allegations that Fox withheld testimony in the case. That could have led to sanctions against Fox’s legal team, although one of his lawyers wrote a letter apologizing to the judge and describing it as a misunderstanding.
A trial would have been one of the most watched defamation trials in recent memory, with potential implications for judicial interpretation of the law if the jury verdict is challenged in higher courts.
After settling this case and a related defamation suit filed on April 9 by Venezuelan businessman Majed Khalil, Fox is still facing a massive lawsuit from another voting system company, Smartmatic, seeking a 2 , which was filed $7 billion. Dominion and Smartmatic also have claims against two other conservative news outlets, Newsmax and One America News.
A Newsmax spokesman said they believe “the facts at issue in Dominion’s case differ materially from those that may have prompted Fox to settle, and no conclusions about Newsmax should be drawn from this comparison.” Newsmax stands by its coverage and analysis of the 2020 election and will continue to vigorously defend the claim.”
Source: Deadline
Mary Crossley is an author at “The Fashion Vibes”. She is a seasoned journalist who is dedicated to delivering the latest news to her readers. With a keen sense of what’s important, Mary covers a wide range of topics, from politics to lifestyle and everything in between.
