ECHOSTAR SATELLITE L.L.C., plf-ap, v. ESPN, INC. def-res

9683-9684. ECHOSTAR SATELLITE L.L.C., plf-ap, v. ESPN, INC. def-res — Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York (E. Joshua Rosenkranz of counsel), for ap — Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP, New York (David L. Yohai of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered November 18, 2011, which denied plaintiff's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and order, same court and Justice, entered December 16, 2011, which denied plaintiff's motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

9683-9684. ECHOSTAR SATELLITE L.L.C., plf-ap, v. ESPN, INC. def-res — Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York (E. Joshua Rosenkranz of counsel), for ap — Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP, New York (David L. Yohai of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered November 18, 2011, which denied plaintiff’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and order, same court and Justice, entered December 16, 2011, which denied plaintiff’s motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied the motion to set aside the verdict on the ground of juror misconduct. Although the court did not authorize the jurors to take notes during trial, plaintiff failed to demonstrate that it had suffered any prejudice resulting from one juror’s preparation of notes at home and use of those notes during deliberations (see Alford v. Sventek, 53 NY2d 743, 745 [1981]). Indeed, plaintiff failed to submit an affidavit from any juror regarding the effect of the notes. Although plaintiff’s counsel’s affirmation stated that other jurors indicated that one juror had used her notes during deliberations, the jurors did not indicate that the notes had swayed the jury’s decision. The court properly denied plaintiff’s request for a hearing to assess the effect, if any, the notes had on the deliberations. Such a hearing should “not be undertaken except in extraordinary circumstances” (People v. Rodriguez, 71 NY2d 214, 218 n 1 [1988]), which are not present here.

ECHOSTAR SATELLITE L.L.C., plf-ap, v. ESPN, INC. def-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal