Advertisement

Experts Say Huge Libel Award Probably Will Be Overturned

Share
From Times Staff and Wire Reports

As the Philadelphia Inquirer prepared to appeal a record $34-million libel judgment, media experts said Friday that the ruling raises serious constitutional questions and will likely be overturned.

A Common Pleas Court jury on Thursday awarded $2.5 million in compensatory damages and $31.5 million in punitive damages to Richard A. Sprague, a former first assistant district attorney. He sued the paper over stories published 17 years ago that questioned his actions as a prosecutor.

The award was the largest ever against the news media.

“It’s unimaginable to me that a punitive damage award in this amount could or would be upheld,” said Floyd Abrams, a prominent First Amendment lawyer. He represents NBC in appealing a $5.3-million libel judgment won by entertainer Wayne Newton.

Advertisement

“This is another example of libel law running amok,” Abrams said. “I think that this case and others will sooner rather than later lead the Supreme Court to address the constitutionality of punitive damages in libel cases.”

Henry Kaufman, general counsel of the Libel Defense Resource Center, a media-sponsored clearinghouse in New York, said only two libel judgments of more than $1 million have been affirmed on appeal.

Sprague, now a successful attorney in private practice, won for the second time before a jury in the case. The Inquirer had earlier successfully appealed a $4.5-million verdict--less than one-seventh the amount of Thursday’s award, which Sprague said gave meaning to the idea of punitive damages.

“I intend to fight to maintain it,” Sprague said Friday. “The whole theory of punitive damages is that it should not just be a little slap on the wrist.”

Inquirer executive editor and president Eugene L. Roberts Jr. said the newspaper would appeal the decision.

The award amounts to about one-third of the newspaper’s net worth, said the Inquirer’s attorney, Samuel E. Klein. Roberts said the newspaper would be able to stay in business if the judgment stands, “but we would be crippled.”

Advertisement
Advertisement