Attorneys for the voting machine company Smartmatic and the cable channel Newsmax argued at a hearing Monday over evidence and witnesses expected to be presented when Smartmatic’s defamation case against the news channel goes to trial later this month.
Smartmatic has accused Newsmax of publishing dozens of false reports claiming that Smartmatic helped rig the 2020 election. Newsmax has argued, in part, that they were reporting on newsworthy claims of fraud.
Howard Cooper, an attorney for Newsmax, argued at Monday’s hearing that the news channel should be able to introduce videos of broadcast segments that he says rebut Smartmatic’s argument that “Newsmax took this position of election fraud [and] not calling the election” for winner Joe Biden.
“One of the ways that we can rebut that theory is by showing shows that were contrary to President Trump’s position,” Cooper said of former President Donald Trump, who falsely claimed there had been massive election fraud.
The two sides also argued over the inclusion of witnesses who would testify about whether Newsmax, in the course of its reporting, reached out to Smartmatic — or instead only reached out to Dominion, another voting machine company that was falsely accused of wrongdoing.
Dominion, in a separate case last year, reached a $787 million settlement with Fox News in a $1.6 billion defamation lawsuit.
Newsmax officials have said under oath that the company contacted or attempted to contact Smartmatic during its coverage of the election and its aftermath.
“We’re not disputing that Dominion and Smartmatic are not the same,” said an attorney for Newsmax. “Some of these Newsmax personnel did get to contact Dominion. It is relevant to the case. It’s relevant to their state of mind.”
A Newsmax microphone is seen during the third day of the 2024 Republican National Convention at the Fiserv Forum in Milwaukee, July 17, 2024.
Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images
“I’d love for you to make that argument if I’m on the other side,” Delaware Superior Court Judge Eric Davis said in response. “Here is the executive producer of this show, and he doesn’t know the difference between Exxon and Chevron.”
After a lengthy argument about other types of evidence the parties would like to introduce at the trial, the judge reviewed the potential witness list and emphasized the need for clear and concise jury instructions.
At one point during the hearing, an attorney for Newsmax requested permission to depose Smartmatic’s damages expert, arguing that the expert’s “reports and charts” on the damages have changed frequently.
“I would only add they were looking for somewhere, and we don’t know yet, between $400 and $600 million in this case,” an attorney for Newsmax said, criticizing “the idea that we would go to a trial without having a full opportunity to do an up-to-date examination of their damages expert.”
An attorney for Smartmatic pushed back, saying that Newsmax attorneys have previously deposed the expert and that “none of the information has changed.”
Judge Davis said he would rule soon on each of the motions.
The trial is scheduled to begin on Sept. 30 in Delaware.
Legal teams are gearing up for a heated battle as Smartmatic, a voting technology company, prepares to file a defamation lawsuit against Newsmax over claims made during the 2020 presidential election. The lawsuit stems from allegations made by Newsmax that Smartmatic was involved in voter fraud and manipulation, which the company vehemently denies.
The legal teams on both sides are currently engaged in intense debates over the evidence that will be presented in court. Smartmatic’s legal team is expected to argue that Newsmax’s false statements have damaged the company’s reputation and caused financial harm. They will likely present evidence to show that the claims made by Newsmax were baseless and had no factual basis.
On the other hand, Newsmax’s legal team is expected to argue that they were reporting on a matter of public interest and that they had a right to express their opinions on the election. They may also try to argue that their statements were protected under the First Amendment.
The outcome of this lawsuit could have far-reaching implications for the media industry and the way in which news organizations report on elections. If Smartmatic is successful in their lawsuit, it could set a precedent for other voting technology companies to take legal action against news outlets that spread false information about their products.
It is clear that both sides are preparing for a long and drawn-out legal battle, with each side confident in their arguments and evidence. As the case moves forward, it will be interesting to see how the courts ultimately decide on this high-stakes defamation lawsuit.
