Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
axamonitor_redaction [2016/12/10 22:41] – [Why We Refused to Remove Redacted Axanar Financial Info] adds summary judgment box Carlos Pedrazaaxamonitor_redaction [Unknown date] (current) – external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1
Line 3: Line 3:
 <wrap lo><wrap lo>//Photo/wnjr/Flickr//</wrap></wrap> <wrap lo><wrap lo>//Photo/wnjr/Flickr//</wrap></wrap>
 </WRAP> </WRAP>
- 
  
 ====== Why We Refused to Remove Redacted Axanar Financial Info ====== ====== Why We Refused to Remove Redacted Axanar Financial Info ======
 +
 {{TOC}} {{TOC}}
 +
 <WRAP> <WRAP>
 //**__ __**// <wrap lo>**By [[user>cpedraza|Carlos Pedraza]]** \\ //**__ __**// <wrap lo>**By [[user>cpedraza|Carlos Pedraza]]** \\
Line 67: Line 68:
 Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, **AxaMonitor** is not liable for "truthfully publishing information released to the public in official court records," even if the information should not have been released, according to Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469, 496 (1975). Under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, **AxaMonitor** is not liable for "truthfully publishing information released to the public in official court records," even if the information should not have been released, according to Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469, 496 (1975).
  
-=== Defense Released Same Information ===+<WRAP right round important 50%> 
 +<wrap lo><wrap em>UPDATE</wrap> On December 29, 2016, defense attorneys admitted — six weeks after that fact — they made an error in disclosing the same Axanar "confidential and sensitive financial information" the defense had criticized the plaintiffs' attorneys for inadvertently releasing.((Notice of Errata re: The Declaration of Kelly N. Oki in Support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment, Document 157, p. 2, 12/29/16.)) 
 +\\ \\ 
 +The amended exhibits accompanying the December 29 filing were meant to replace the original documents, with the financial information simply removed. The inadvertently filed pages, the defense claimed, "are not relevant to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment." Axanar attorney Erin Ranahan had [[excluding_evidence#axanar_s_financials|already indicated]] her intent to bar the jury from seeing any of Axanar's financial data. 
 +\\ \\ 
 +The plaintiffs, naturally, want the jury to see how Peters raised and spent $1.4 million, collected from Star Trek fans, on a film he never produced.</wrap> 
 +</WRAP> 
 + 
 +=== Defense Released Same Information in Error ===
  
 Most importantly, while certain text in the plaintiffs' partial summary judgment motion was indeed redacted, the information **AxaMonitor** reported appears unredacted by the defense in documents they themselves released into the public domain. Most importantly, while certain text in the plaintiffs' partial summary judgment motion was indeed redacted, the information **AxaMonitor** reported appears unredacted by the defense in documents they themselves released into the public domain.
Line 84: Line 93:
  
 ---- ----
-**Keywords** {{tag>lawsuit about plaintiffs defendants parties}}+**Keywords** {{tag>lawsuit about plaintiffs defendants parties summary_judgment}}