A federal judge set an April retrial date on Tuesday for Sarah Palin’s libel case against The New York Times, even as lawyers on both sides expressed hope for potential settlement talks for the first time.
Judge Jed S. Rakoff, during a telephone conference, announced that if a deal couldn’t be reached, the trial would commence on April 14.
The lawsuit by the former Republican vice presidential candidate and ex-governor of Alaska originates from a 2017 New York Times editorial. Rakoff had dismissed the case in February 2022 while the jury was still deliberating, but the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan reinstated Palin’s claim in August.
David L. Axelrod, a lawyer representing The New York Times, informed Judge Rakoff that both parties had discussed exploring settlement options, citing difficulties in locating witnesses due to the elapsed time.
“It may be that we don’t need a trial at all,” Axelrod remarked.
Kenneth G. Turkel, representing Sarah Palin, concurred, noting that the two parties had never previously attempted mediation.
“We’d like to give it a shot,” said Turkel.
Judge Rakoff showed enthusiasm for a settlement.
“I’m all for that if you’re seriously interested in settling. You can settle it in a matter of days,” he stated, adding that he could likely arrange for a magistrate judge to meet with them and facilitate settlement discussions within a day.
Axelrod confirmed that the lawyers were open to involving a third party as a mediator. Turkel echoed the sentiment, indicating a willingness for discussions, as none had taken place yet.
Palin filed the lawsuit against the newspaper after an editorial falsely connected her campaign rhetoric to a mass shooting, claiming it harmed her reputation and career.
The New York Times conceded its editorial contained inaccuracies but insisted that the errors were promptly corrected and described them as an “honest mistake,” asserting that there was no intent to harm Palin.
After dismissing the case, Judge Rakoff allowed the jury to complete their deliberations and announce their verdict, which was unfavorable to Palin.
However, the 2nd Circuit Court reversed Rakoff’s decision, thereby paving the way for a new trial. The appeals court concluded that Rakoff had made credibility judgments, evaluated evidence, and disregarded facts or inferences that a reasonable juror could potentially find supportive of Palin’s case.
The court also observed that Rakoff’s ruling during deliberations might have been communicated to jurors via cell phone alerts, potentially compromising the reliability of the verdict.
