U.S. Navy veteran Zachary Young scored another victory Friday before his win High-profile libel trial v. CNN, where a Florida judge ruled that the network's expert witness could not testify that he did not lose any income or profits as a result of the segment revolving around the case.
Young claims CNN defamed him by insinuating he illegally profited through the “black market” when he helped people flee Afghanistan during World War II. Biden administration Military withdrawal from the country in 2021. The veteran believes CNN “ruined his reputation and business” during a segment that year from Jake Tapper's show “The Lead,” which was shared on social media and also repackaged for CNN's website.
Young's legal team argued that Brian Buss, whom CNN wanted to use as an expert, should not be able to testify “on the basis of his qualifications and methodology and that his opinion is cumulative of another retained expert” by CNN, according to the court. Deposit that was previously obtained Fox News Digital.
A US Navy veteran who sued CNN scores major legal victories ahead of a high-stakes defamation trial
US Navy veteran Zachary Young believes CNN “destroyed his reputation and business by describing him as an illegal profiteer who took advantage of desperate Afghans” during a November 11, 2021 segment on CNN's “The Lead with Jake Tapper.” (CNN/screenshot)
CNN responded by saying that Boss's “credentials and methodology were sound, his opinions were valid and that his testimony was not cumulative of another expert's opinion,” according to Judge William Henry.
Judge Henry cited Florida's standards that expert opinions and testimony “must be relevant and reliable,” and noted that CNN retained Buss “to provide an opinion regarding Young's lost income/profits and mitigation of damages, and as a rebuttal witness for plaintiffs' expert.” “.
“In formulating his opinions, Mr. Boss reviewed documents provided by Plaintiffs regarding prior income, including tax returns, employment contracts, bank statements, reports, and other financial records, along with deposit testimony,” Judge Henry wrote.
CNN faces defamation suit over Afghanistan withdrawal story: 'Evidence of actual malice'
CNN broadcast a photo of plaintiff Zachary Young during the segment in question. (CNN/screenshot)
Judge Henry added that after analyzing these elements, Boss opined that Young “did not experience a reduction in personal income or business profits as a result of the defendant's publications”, “any loss of income was a result of the employment contract ending and the plaintiffs not seeking additional funds”. “Young did not invest in new business activities following the publications” and “any financial losses suffered by Plaintiffs are likely the result of factors other than the publications.”
“Plaintiffs primarily attack Mr. Boss's ability to testify on the basis that he erred in opinion as to the causes of damages, assuming that Mr. Boss should have assumed liability and then provided an account of lost income/profit,” Justice Henry wrote.
Meanwhile, CNN said damages must necessarily have “some kind of nexus” between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's damages, according to the judge.
“What naturally emerges from this case law are three things: first, plaintiffs need to present testimony and evidence linking the alleged wrongdoing to the damages claimed; and second, any expert who testifies must be competent to provide his or her opinions, whether it be on the court or the court,” Justice Henry wrote. Calculation of damages or causation; Third, causation may be provided by one or more witnesses or other evidence.”
“For example, if plaintiffs had a company they contracted with that canceled the contract because of the postings, the causation element for that portion of lost income would come from a lay witness from that company saying it canceled because of the postings rather than any expert,” he continued. “In this case, Mr. Boss would be qualified to make a calculation of lost profits or income. The items he considered for that purpose are generally the types of information used to formulate such an opinion. To some extent, his decision to exclude certain items from the calculation…it would be appropriate to It is within his jurisdiction that, likewise, Mr. Boss could reasonably account for Plaintiffs' efforts (or lack thereof) to obtain employment after the publications as not to mitigate their damages.”
However, Judge Henry ruled that “Boss goes too far in a final opinion that Defendant's publications had no effect on Plaintiffs' income.”
“While he certainly could have talked about the expiring contract and lack of recurring revenue, his ultimate conclusion was essentially that Plaintiffs had not presented evidence that no one would talk to him or hire him because of the posts, and therefore he lost no income because of the posts,” Judge Henry wrote.
CNN host Jake Tapper and reporter Alex Marquardt during a segment about a defamation lawsuit. (CNN/screenshot)
“If he were doing forensic consulting work or working as a chartered financial analyst for a company in a private setting, that kind of inference might be appropriate. However, for the purposes of offering such an opinion, which was essentially 'I don't believe,'” he continued: “Plaintiffs who did not Nobody talks to them because they showed me that people won't talk to them, that doesn't pass muster of evidence.” “For that purpose, he will serve as an arbiter of truthfulness and credibility, which is the job of the jury and not something for which Mr. Boss is qualified.”
The judge decided that “Boss could testify about what he reviewed, what the documents showed regarding pre-publication income and ongoing revenue projections, what items of revenue were not recurring or projected future income, and what plaintiffs did or did not do to obtain the income yet history of the publications” but “the conclusion that Plaintiffs have not suffered any loss of income/profits as a result of the publications is highly speculative and beyond the qualifications of Mr. Boss for the reasons discussed above.”
Judge Henry added: “However, the conclusion that the plaintiffs have not suffered any loss of income/profits as a result of the publications is highly speculative and beyond Mr Boss’s qualifications for the reasons discussed above.”
Judge Henry had previously denied CNN's motion for summary judgment, allowing Young to “proceed with his punitive damages claim” and announcing that the court had found that he “did not take money from the Afghans.”
The civil trial is scheduled to begin on January 6 before Judge Henry in the Circuit Court of Bay County, Florida.
