Legal English Spring 2023 KPI
Organizers:
- Organized by
-
5.4: Depp – Heard Timeline Summary
5.4: Depp – Heard Timeline Summary
Write a post with your answers and use some of the legal English terms we studied. Explain legal English words as necessary to make sure everyone understands you.
Imagine someone asked you how it is possible that a jury decided that both Amber Heard and Johnny Depp must pay each other money at the end of a trial. And then asks you why Johnny Depp would have agreed to accept much less money. And they also want to know why this case was in Virginia.
- 3 Replies
I’ve looked through internet and found, that even our news agencies wrote about that ordinary scandal between former-husband and his wife. It reflects that ukrainians became more similar to americans – like scandals with sexual context and big money awards). Its not good, that even we discuss about such cases. But I think it is reasoned broad-distributed information and document from that action to show them without intruding on privacy. Let me start from a new word “commence”. Jonny Depp commences (i.e. begin) that civil case (action is a synonym – dispute between two parties with contrary interests) bringing his claim to Virginia (Fairfax) Circuit Court. He filed the complaint, alleging that Amber Heard (texas actress) defamed him. in the publication (I’ve not understood “an op-ed”) in the WP. “She was a perpetrator” sounds in Jonny’s complaint and futher 30 pages of the complaint (may be counsels make bill for quantity of pages)). … .
Persuant to the complaint Elon is not so smart and clever if he closed to such a woman… Amber’s counsels tried to ask the Court to dismiss the complaint, referring to inconvenient forum (place and jurisdiction of litigation). They filed motion to dismiss and memorandum of law in support of that motion (called “brief”). But point was not the lack of personal jurisdiction. Amber filed the counterclaim, alleging that rich Johnny defaimed her. But we will never learn true, because it is not so “hot” and seems to be usual (not interesting). Rich Johnny was awarded by jury with compensation in 10 mln.$ (demanded 50 mln$ in each of three counts). Poor Amber was awarded by jury with compensation in 2 mln.$ (demanded 100 mln$). Are only they so greedy or their counsels?
As the result of the action Johnny took only 1 mln$ and parties reached settlement. I don’t know why he agreed to accept less money, might be this case is not about money, but about personal powers and emotions. Johnny’s counsels advised him to choose Virginia jurisdiction due to its legislation was more apropriate for his claim.