Premium

Plot twist: Fox News producer sues over alleged pressure to cook Dominion lawsuit testimony

AP Photo/Mark Lennihan

It’s not just Alvin Bragg providing legal drama in Manhattan this week. The dogfight over defamation between Fox News and Dominion Voting Systems took an unexpected turn last night, when a Fox producer filed her own lawsuit against her employer. Not only does Abby Grossberg accuse Fox of sexual discrimination, she also claims that Fox attorneys are attempting to tamper with her testimony in the Dominion case — and making her out to be a patsy.

If Grossberg can sustain these allegations, well … yowza:

On the eve of a key hearing in a defamation lawsuit against Fox News, an employee who was deposed in the case said she has sued the company, alleging that its lawyers coached her to shift blame for programming decisions around the airing of Trump allies’ false claims of election fraud. …

Grossberg was subpoenaed by Dominion last year to discuss her work on televised segments in which Bartiromo discussed far-fetched and unproven claims of election fraud. But in her deposition prep sessions, the producer claims, Fox lawyers “were displeased with her being too candid” and took extra time “to make sure she got her story straight and in line with [Fox’s] position.”

She said she was urged to give generic answers such as “I do not recall” and discouraged from offering explanations of how Bartiromo’s understaffed team was unable to keep up with warnings from Dominion about false statements they had aired.

By giving what she calls “false/misleading and evasive answers” that she said were encouraged by Fox’s legal team, Grossberg says she put herself at risk of committing perjury, while “subtly shifting all responsibility for the alleged defamation against Dominion onto her shoulders, and by implication, those of her trusted female colleague, Ms. Bartiromo, rather than the mostly male higher ups at Fox News.”

Dominion has to be loving this, right? We’ll get to that in a moment, but let’s stick with the multiple levels of drama in Grossberg’s complaint. How exactly can Grossberg prove these allegations with a preponderance of evidence? She will have to reveal communications between Fox’ attorneys and herself, which sets up an entirely different legal battle. Fox claims that those conversations are privileged as attorney-client communications, and they filed their own lawsuit to keep Grossberg from revealing anything said:

On Monday afternoon, Fox filed its own suit against Ms. Grossberg, seeking to enjoin her from filing claims that would shed light on her discussions with the company’s lawyers. A judge has not yet ruled on Fox’s suit. Later on Monday, according to her lawyer, Parisis G. Filippatos, Fox also placed Ms. Grossberg on forced administrative leave.

Fox News issued a statement to media, including Hot Air, and included its filing for a restraining order. They also claim that Grossberg is retaliating for a poor performance review, but that doesn’t explain the TRO request:

“FOX News Media engaged an independent outside counsel to immediately investigate the concerns raised by Ms. Grossberg, which were made following a critical performance review. Her allegations in connection with the Dominion case are baseless and we will vigorously defend Fox against all of her claims.

“Ms. Grossberg has threatened to disclose Fox’s attorney-client privileged information and we filed a temporary restraining order to protect our rights.”

Interestingly, while Grossberg filed her lawsuit in Manhattan’s SDNY federal court, Fox filed its application for a TRO in state court. It relies on New York’s law and precedent regarding attorney-client privilege rather than federal law, which seems … curious. New York’s state precedent governs cases at the state and local levels; federal courts have their own rules governing evidence and privilege. Would a federal court be encumbered at all by a TRO in a state court?

An attorney with more experience would need to untangle that and Fox’s claim, but it seems weak. Grossberg wants to discuss what Fox’ attorneys told her, and if she wasn’t their client, then privilege doesn’t apply. And if they did represent Grossberg, then the privilege would be hers to waive, not Fox or the attorneys. Either way, Grossberg is apparently alleging misconduct in the form of witness tampering or subornation of perjury, and privilege doesn’t normally apply to attorney misconduct.

Keep in mind that allegations in lawsuits are just that — allegations, not fact. Grossberg’s lawsuit doesn’t prove anything yet. But you can bet that Dominion and its attorneys will now want to depose Grossberg again, and delve into these matters before their defamation case comes to trial in a few weeks. Today, though, both sides will argue for a summary judgment in their favor in Delaware:

With less than one month until a trial is set to begin in the defamation lawsuit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox News, attorneys from both sides are expected to seek a summary judgment during a pretrial hearing Tuesday.

The Delaware judge overseeing the case will hear arguments from both Fox and Dominion attorneys on their respective motions for summary judgments, during which both parties will essentially ask the judge to rule on the case before it heads to trial. …

Dan Abrams, ABC News’ chief legal analyst, said it would be a long shot for either side to win its motions at this phase, given the overwhelming amount of evidence.

“A motion for summary judgment is a difficult motion to win. It’s basically asking a judge to intervene and say, ‘There’s no need to take this case to a jury,'” Abrams said. “I wouldn’t expect that either party is going to win this case in summary judgment.”

This is a pro forma step for attorneys in cases such as these, a kind of kitchen-sink approach that leaves no stone unturned. Abrams is almost certainly correct; the issues in the case are both murky and profound, plus the Sullivan precedent complicates all the calculations in a defamation suit against a news organization.

Grossberg’s lawsuit might, however, expedite a different kind of end before the April 17 trial — a settlement. If Fox’ attempt to gag Grossberg fails and she testifies to any form of misconduct, Dominion can use that to argue that Fox knew its guilt in the matter and tampered with testimony to cover it up. That will go a long way to pushing a jury past the Sullivan threshold if the judge in Delaware allows it into the record. That risk alone could incentivize Fox to cut its losses and put an end to the whole embarrassing matter, not to mention incentivizing the attorneys involved to settle quickly with Grossberg as well.

In other words, stay tuned.

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement