Saturday, August 24, 2019

Michael Mann Loses In Court

I am hoping this is good news for Mark Steyn.


Korora said...

Unable to follow link. No connection established.

Aggie said...

As the articles read, it does appear that a tide is turning. But it's a shame that objective reporting and a willing adherence to the Scientific Method by scientists on both sides has not been a prominent feature anywhere in this saga. Instead we get these SLAPP lawsuits like this one, that are well-funded and graced with under-reporting, against a struggling defense on the other side.

RichardJohnson said...

Powerline Michael Mann Refuses to Produce Data, Loses Case states the suit was dismissed with prejudice, which would mean it could not be appealed.

Principia Scientific now reports that the court in British Columbia has dismissed Mann’s lawsuit with prejudice, and assessed costs against him.

But in the link Powerline used to support the dismissal with prejudice claim- the same one that AVI used- I see no evidence the suit was dismissed with prejudice. The article does provide a link to the Canadian court system ( cost $6), but doesn't quote any such decision.

(Under court rules, Mann’s legal team have up to 30 days to file an appeal. For readers interested in accessing the court website directly, use this link.")
Note that a decision with prejudice cannot be appealed.

(My HOA got sued by a wealthy investor. The day of the trial, he wanted out- as he knew his suit was nonsense. The suit got dismissed with prejudice- he couldn't appeal. There was a jury trial for court costs, which he lost.)

Sam L. said...

A consummation deVOUTly to be wished, and long, Long, LONG overdue!

Texan99 said...

The last time I followed Steyn's case closely, he was trying to advance his libel defense aggressively, knowing that Mann would wilt in discovery, but Steyn's co-defendants (publishers) were proceeding conservatively with delay. Steyn's preferred approach could yield the same result as the recent Canadian dismissal, but the conservative dilatory approach plays into Mann's hands. Mann wants to sue without having to make his case on the merits immediately. Amazing that he would let his case be dismissed for want of prosecution rather than turn over his precious data--and still complain of his treatment in court.

I don't know how it works under Canadian law, but in the U.S. a dismissal with prejudice usually just means with prejudice to refiling. A dismissal for failure to state a claim should be appealable. But a dismissal on the ground of failure to prosecute a claim is a discretionary, equitable call by the judge, and therefore requires a showing of abuse of discretion to overturn, which is a very difficult standard on appeal. In this case, I understand Mann pushed for a delay, which was granted on the condition that he meet certain deadlines for turning over evidence. He blew the deadlines, and the judge poured him out. What the basis of his threatened appeal would be, I can't imagine.

It was reported that the judge awarded "court fees," but that's not the same as attorney's fees. It could be fairly minor administrative filing fees; that's what it usually means here.