Climate Change on Trial SPECIAL EPISODE: Mann's Infrivolity to Man
Mar 19, 2025
Christopher Bartolomucci, a Partner at Share Jaffe and a seasoned litigator focusing on constitutional law and defamation, shares insights into the ongoing legal saga of Professor Michael Mann. They discuss the judge's shocking ruling that Mann and his team presented false data, alongside the significant reduction of his punitive damages award. The conversation delves into the complexities of legal appeals, the implications of SLAPP motions, and the necessity for transparency in the judiciary. This case raises critical questions about justice and accountability in science.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Massive Punitive Award Dramatically Cut
- The court reduced the punitive award from $1,000,000 to $5,000 based on constitutional limits and ratio reasoning.
- Judge found a million-to-one ratio between punitive and compensatory damages was untenable under due process precedents.
Constitutional Limits On Punitive Ratios
- The judge applied Supreme Court standards limiting punitive awards relative to compensatory damages to protect due process.
- Courts typically allow modest punitive-to-compensatory ratios and view extreme ratios as constitutionally suspect.
National Review Recovers Half-Million Fees
- National Review won an anti-SLAPP motion and recovered about $500,000 in attorney fees from Michael Mann.
- Christopher Bartolomucci highlights that Mann now owes National Review those fees after their successful SLAPP defense.