Samantha Markle was unsuccessful in her second effort to bring a case against her half-sister after she was discharged.
Additionally, if Donald Trump were to win the presidency once more, he might decide to remove Prince Harry.
To learn more about the launch of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s new website, click here.
The American novelist filed a claim for compensation in the amount of $75,000, claiming that Meghan Markle had made statements that were allegedly defamatory against her in a number of different media outlets.
Already, in March 2023, United States Judicial District Judge Charlene Honeywell informed Samantha Markle that she could not argue that her half-sister had defamed her with the book Finding Freedom: Harry and Meghan and the Making of a Modern Royal Family. This was due to the fact that Meghan Markle had neither written nor published the book; rather, Omid Scobie and Carolyn Durand were the authors of the book.
An additional allegation that Samantha Markle made in her initial complaint was that the Duchess of Sussex had defamed her during her interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2021. Specifically, she claimed that the Duchess had made the statement that she “grew up as an only child.” However, Judge Honeywell stated that the defendant is only expressing her opinion about her childhood and her relationship with her half-siblings. This is something that a reasonable listener would understand given the circumstances. As a result, the court has determined that the assertion made by the defendant cannot be objectively verified and cannot be supported by empirical evidence.
Samantha Markle, on the other hand, was granted permission to restate her requests for the interview with Oprah Winfrey during the hearing that took place in 2023. The same court made the decision last week that Samantha Markle simply “disagreed” with Meghan Markle’s “opinions rather than statements of fact.” As a result, the motions were denied.
“We are pleased with the court’s decision to dismiss the case,” Michael J. Kump, the attorney for Meghan Markle, said in a statement that was provided to People magazine.
A motion to dismiss the defamation case that Samantha Markle, Meghan Markle’s half-sister, brought against her has been granted. Samantha Markle initiated the complaint against Meghan Markle.
Following an interview that Markle gave to Oprah Winfrey in 2021 for CBS, in which she stated that she was an only child and did not have a strong relationship with Samantha, her half-sister from her father Thomas Markle’s first marriage, Markle’s half-sister filed a lawsuit against her for slander. In addition, Samantha claimed in the lawsuit that the documentary series Harry & Meghan, which will be shown on Netflix in 2022, contains fourteen remarks that were deemed to be defamatory of her.
Samantha said in her lawsuit that the people around her “turned against” her, considering her as “an opportunist trying to cash in on her sister’s success and fame, despite having no relationship with her.” Samantha explained that she had no relationship with her sister. In the complaint, Samantha requested a sum of seventy-five thousand dollars in damages.
An order that was released on March 12 said that the complaint was dismissed with prejudice, which means that the identical claim cannot be filed again. The decision was issued because Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell ruled that Samantha was unable to offer significant evidence to indicate that she was a victim of defamation.
Michael Kump, Meghan’s attorney, declared in a statement that the client and his family were “pleased with the Court’s ruling dismissing the case.” In a statement that was sent out via email, Samantha’s attorney referred to the judgment as “upsetting.” They also stated that they “will be appealing this decision to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, and hope that the three judge panel sees it differently.”
In the request to dismiss, Judge Honeywell stated that the examples that were mentioned in the lawsuit are only a question of opposing opinions. For example, the motion to dismiss reads as follows: “Plaintiff alleges that the statements painted her as ‘a stranger, a liar,’ and ‘a deceptive fame-seeking imposter with avaricious intentions.'” She continues by arguing that the words “insinuated that [Plaintiff] has concocted a fictitious story to reap some inappropriate reward from [Defendant’s fame.” [She] goes on to say that this is one of her main points. These… are fundamental examples of opinions that cannot be validated, and as a result, they cannot be used as the foundation for a defamation lawsuit.
https://fixr.co/event/etox-capsule-tickets-174097114
https://forum.maidenfans.com/members/jakijordann.131020/#about
https://crypto.jobs/companies/etox-en-mexico
https://www.dibiz.com/jakijordann
https://devfolio.co/projects/etox-en-mexico-9495
https://etox-en-mexico.bravesites.com/
https://www.yepdesk.com/etox-en-mexico
https://www.remotehub.com/etox.capsule
https://www.eventcreate.com/e/etox-capsula-solucion-inte
https://glonet.com/jakijordann
https://www.weddingwire.com/website/jakijordann-and-etox-en-mexico
https://www.podcasts.com/etox-en-mexico
https://myapnea.org/members/jakijordann/posts
https://in.pinterest.com/pin/1142506999208015161
https://sites.google.com/view/etox-en-mexico/home
https://store100453010.company.site/