0:04
defamation litigation particularly in
0:06
light of technological advances has
0:09
become quite uh
0:11
complex in the justice system and we
0:15
have been one of the leaders certainly
0:18
in Minnesota but in litigation around
0:22
the country in fact on handling
0:25
defamation both on the plaintiff side
0:28
and on the defense side we not long ago
0:32
handled a case uh in North Dakota in
0:35
front of a North Dakota jury that
0:37
resulted in two plus million verdict
0:40
which in a defamation case I think at
0:42
the time and maybe yet till today is the
0:46
largest defamation verdict in North
0:48
Dakota history and possibly in Minnesota
0:50
History as well that case uh we handled
0:56
for a plaintiff who was damaged in their
0:59
business was damaged and so there were
1:01
concrete
1:03
identifiable
1:05
monetary amounts that could be presented
1:09
to the jury that they could grab a hold
1:11
of often times that’s not the case in
1:14
defamation lawsuits uh somebody’s
1:17
reputation is damaged and it may not be
1:20
business uh related but they have been
1:23
hurt they have been harmed in the public
1:25
eye or view of them and they want
1:30
uh to bring in action because of it
1:33
litigation is expensive and so there are
1:36
many defamation cases that one wants to
1:40
bring that they don’t ultimately bring
1:41
because they won’t recover as much as
1:44
they spend uh but we have a very good
1:48
understanding of that and are able to
1:50
have discussions with uh the client or
1:54
potential client about uh their
1:57
objectives and how best to achieve their
2:00
objectives the key in restoring one’s
2:03
reputation often times is the objective
2:06
and sometimes litigation is not the best
2:08
way to handle that and we will have
2:10
those discussions uh with the client and
2:14
often tell them that in fact you’re
2:16
going to shine a light on this
2:17
reputational issue rather than uh resolve