Amber Heard asked a Virginia judge to throw it away Loss of judgment in defamation lawsuit It was introduced by ex-husband Johnny Depp – claiming the evidence doesn’t hold.
Heard’s lawyers, who were convicted in three defamation lawsuits filed by Depp, claimed in a 43-page motion filed last week that the verdict was not supported by evidence during the former couple’s successful trial.
The document claims that Depp “only proceeded to libel through an implied theory, abandoning any allegations that Mrs. Heard’s statements were in fact false,” the papers filed a suit on Friday.
Heard’s lawyers also argue that juror 15 on the panel may have been wrongly chosen by giving a wrong date of birth during jury selection – 1945 rather than the actual year of 1970.
This discrepancy raises the question [of] The attorneys’ request stated: Whether Juror 15 has actually received a summons to serve on jury and has been properly examined by the court to serve on jury.
It is not known if the juror actually deliberated the case.
Depp, 58, has filed a lawsuit against his ex-wife alleging that he damaged his career in a 2018 editorial in the Washington Post She claims she was a victim of domestic violence – and leaves no doubt that the reference was to the star of the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise.
Depp’s attorney Ben Chiu sent an email to Courthouse News stating that Heard’s file was “what we had expected, only longer, and more objectively,” The Guardian newspaper reported.
In last month’s ruling, the jury awarded Depp $10 million in damages and $5 million in punitive damages — although Virginia law capped the total at $10.3 million.
Heard, who opposed, received $2 million for one of her claims.
But Chiu and the Aquaman actress’ legal team argue in the new lawsuit that Depp failed to prove that the actor’s career and reputation were affected by Heard’s editorial.
“Mr. Depp has not provided any evidence of any material damages incurred in the limited time frame of December 18, 2018, until November 2, 2020 as a result of the editorial.” “There was no evidence of any project or business opportunities lost due to the editorial.”
Lawyers noted that Depp did not sign a contract for the sixth installment of Pirates of the Caribbean, despite his claim at trial that The Washington Post commissioned him for the role.
The papers also argue that Depp failed to refute the allegations of abuse.
“Mr. Qiu wrote that Depp was required to prove at the time the article was published, Ms. Heard did not believe that she had been abused or had doubts about whether she had been abused.
But Mr. Depp has provided no evidence that Ms Heard does not believe she was abused. Instead, the evidence supported it overwhelmingly [that] Mrs. Heard believed that she had been the victim of abuse at the hands of Mr. Depp.
“Therefore, Mr. Depp did not meet the legal requirements for actual malice, and the ruling should be overturned,” the newspapers said.