In a troubling Goliath v. David libel case, a jury has awarded a whopping $7 million in damages to Illinois Supreme Court Chief Justice Bob Thomas, finding a small-town newspaper defamed him by reporting that he traded a vote for a political favor.

Judges at any level, let alone the top judge of a state, are rarely libel plaintiffs and Thomas had to show the Kane County Chronicle of Geneva, Ill., acted with malice in publishing two columns about his handling of an attorney misconduct case.

But the small-town, 14,000-circulation newspaper went to trial with a hamstrung defense, unable to prove the alleged defamatory statements were true because the columnist, Bill Page, relied on confidential sources and a state appeals court had foreclosed any inquiry into the Supreme Court's judicial communications.

The high-powered Thomas, meanwhile, paraded several of his judicial colleagues into court to testify on his behalf. The Kane County Circuit Court jury found both columns defamatory and awarded him $5 million for damage to his reputation, $1 million for lost potential future income and $1 million for emotional distress.

In many wrongful-death cases, the damages are less than $7 million. The verdict will “have a chilling effect on the 1st Amendment and the press' ability to criticize public officials, especially elected officials," defense attorney Stephen Rosenfeld told the Chicago Tribune.

Page pierced Thomas' thin skin in writing about the misconduct case of former Kane County prosecutor Meg Gorecki. According to the columnist, Thomas initially was “out for blood,” favoring severe discipline for Gorecki, but backed off after her allies in the Republican Party agreed to support a friend of his in a Kane County judicial election.

"Bill Page has hung a 'justice for sale' sign around my neck," Thomas, a former Chicago Bears kicker, testified. "Bill Page said I can't be fair. He's taken away my integrity and my good name. I'm here to get it back."

Page, who no longer works for the Chronicle, insisted he "had confidential sources that provided me with information that I believed was proven to be accurate.” But he obviously was not able to identify those sources and jurors felt the paper did not do enough to establish the sources were credible.

"We just feel if they would have done a little work they should have been able to substantiate this without confidential sources," juror Kelly Groves said.

Whether that amounts to sufficient evidence of malice should be an issue on appeal. Groves' comment suggests the jury applied the negligence standard of private-figure libel cases, rather than the higher malice standard of public-figure cases.

The trial judge also did not allow the defense to argue that, as a columnist, Page was not held to the standards of a reporter. And last year, the Illinois Court of Appeal ruled that the defense could not question Thomas' colleagues about the Gorecki case because the information was protected under a “judicial deliberation privilege.” Thomas v. Page, 837 N.E.2d 483

Four Illinois Supreme Court justices and a former chief justice testified at trial for the plaintiff, however, praising his integrity and calling Page's columns “outrageous.”

By Matthew Heller
11/20/06