Original title before update: Breaking: Dr. Tim Ball wins @MichaelEMann lawsuit – Mann has to pay
See the update below.
Readers surely recall that the easily offended Dr. Michael Mann launched a court case for defamation against climate skeptic Dr. Tim Ball of Canada.
In Feburary 2018 there was a complete dismissal in the lawsuit brought against Dr. Ball by Andrew Weaver of Canada, also for “defamation”.
The Weaver defamation case involved an article Ball wrote saying that the IPCC had diverted almost all climate research funding and scientific investigation to anthropogenic global warming (AGW). This meant that there was virtually no advance in the wider understanding of climate and climate change. Ball referenced an interview with Weaver and attempts by a student to arrange a debate. Ball made some comments that were not fully substantiated, so they became the base of the defamation lawsuit.
That case was completely dismissed, you can read more here.
Now in the Mann case, which goes back to 2011, there’s also a complete dismissal. Ball wrote to me less than an hour ago, asking me to announce it here.
He writes:
Hi Anthony
Michael Mann’s case against me was dismissed this morning by the BC Supreme Court and they awarded me [court] costs.
Tim Ball
This is a developing story, I’ll add more as we know more.
UPDATE:
Dr. Mann Has Posted On Twitter In Reply To This Article
Mann’s statement is here: https://twitter.com/MichaelEMann/status/1164910044414189568
For those who are blocked by Dr. Mann: (including me)
And if you’re blocked on Facebook by Dr. Mann, here is that statement:
John O’Sullivan of PSI wrote to one of our moderators with this intro and statement given by Dr. Ball that I was not aware of. Mann of course does not tell his readers this other very important fact, sort of like what he did in “hide the decline” by not reporting negative results that compromised his argument. Mann was doing most of the foot dragging that caused such long delays as the case has been active since 2011.
As Mark Steyn once pointed out; “the process is the punishment “.
O’Sullivan writes:
In short, Mann’s responsive statement is:
- Stark admission he lost fair and square
- A disingenuous argument that the Dismissal was granted merely on the basis of Mann’s “delay” in not submitting his R2 numbers in a timely fashion.
The case has gone on an entire nine years.
On that point, this is where readers may wish to refer to the article ‘Fatal Courtroom Act Ruins Michael ‘Hockey Stick’ Mann‘ (July 4, 2017). In it they offered analysis as to Mann’s fatal legal error. As Dr Ball explained at that time:
“Michael Mann moved for an adjournment of the trial scheduled for February 20, 2017. We had little choice because Canadian courts always grant adjournments before a trial in their belief that an out of court settlement is preferable. We agreed to an adjournment with conditions. The major one was that he [Mann] produce all documents including computer codes by February 20th, 2017. He failed to meet the deadline.”
As I explained in the article, Mann (and his crooked lawyer) had shown bad faith, thereby rendering his case liable for dismissal. I urged Tim to pursue that winning tactic and thankfully he did.
Assisting Dr Ball has been a huge honor for me and probably one of the greatest achievements of my life. But Tim only won this famous courtroom battle thanks to massive worldwide grassroots support.
Anthony: So, as usual, in my opinion Dr. Mann’s ego interprets the facts only in ways that suit his viewpoint, which is the whole reason he got into trouble with the hockey-stick in the first place.
And it isn’t just me who thinks Mann’s arguments are merit-less, in the other defamation case he is pursuing, he has no friends:
Mann’s media buddies leave him high and dry – oppose his lawsuit
Twenty-four media organizations, including The Washington Post, NBC Universal, and Fox News, have sided with the conservative National Review and free market-leaning Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) over a defamation lawsuit brought by a leading climate scientist.
The organizations, which also included the Society of Professional Journalists and the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia, were signatories to a Feb. 13, letter filed with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, in which both the National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute requested a rehearing of their case before the full appeals court.
In December 2018, a three-judge panel amended a previous ruling against them. But according to the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, which represents the two-dozen media groups, a full rehearing of the case is now “warranted.”
“The panel’s decision on the merits of plaintiff’s defamation claim … may have unintended and undesirable consequences in future cases implicating the exercise of amici’s right to freedom of speech and of the press,” attorneys for the Reporters Committee stated.
Read it here: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/02/22/manns-media-buddies-leave-him-high-and-dry-oppose-his-lawsuit/
These two quotes seem relevant to Dr. Mann’s travails, and I think the first one speaks loudly to his “save the planet from global warming” machinations:
When any man is more stupidly vain and outrageously egotistic than his fellows, he will hide his hideousness in humanitarianism. –George Moore
Egotism is the anesthetic which nature gives us to deaden the pain of being a fool. Dr. Herbert Shofield
UPDATE #2
Then there is this:
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Fantastic news. Mann wasn’t even spending his own money. Evil corrupt bastard.
Should have been punitive damages to Ball as well but in US courts this is almost common sense.
As I understand it, Dr. Ball didn’t file a countersuit, so there would be no damages at all, let alone punitive damages. A pity really – your sentiment is correct.
Sorry, should have said Canadian courts. I don’t know those courts as well.
Wait! Where’s Stokes to tell us Dr. Ball didn’t really win?
At your service. Here is Mike Mann’s account. He says there was no finding on the merits of the case. Each party pays their own costs. The case was dismissed because of excessive delay.
And we all know why Mann “delayed”
Discovery would be devastating for him.
Each party pays their own costs.
Not really, no.
According to Dr. Ball above, Mann pays court costs. Mann admits as much:
“The provision in the Court’s order relating to costs does NOT mean that I will pay Ball’s legal fees.”
I think the court confirms both claims to be true:
Terms of Order:
1. Order that the claim made by Plaintiff be dismissed
2. Costs will follow the event and of the action since the action is dismissed
“The case was dismissed because of excessive delay [on the part of Mann].”
There. Fixed it for you. You’re welcome!
🙂
This is a huge shame. Penn state had such a sterling reputation up until now.
You will know the tree by it’s fruits…
You forgot the /sarc> tag.
Nick,
And we all know that Mann is famous worldwide for his honesty, humility and “Nobel Prize” winning efforts.
It might be a good idea to research what “costs” means in the context of Canadian civil litigation before reposting Mann’s views.
See for example, https://www.dickinson-wright.com/practice-areas/canadian-litigation-practice-areas?tab=0
Toronto August 25, 2019 at 10:01 am
Hi I pulled the “Legal costs” section from your link.
looking further in the link there is a section the states foreigners could be required the post a bond which would be used in the event they lost. Interesting did the deep pockets post a bond to cover Dr Ball’s legal expenses?
This is going to be fun. The Canadian system seems be set up to punish frivolous suits.
So is a dismissal considered a loss to the person bringing the suit?
Oh and thank you for the link
michael
Legal Costs
Unlike in the United States, the general rule in Canada is that the successful party is entitled to be compensated for at least some of its legal costs (i.e. fees and disbursements) by the losing party. This rule applies to virtually all proceedings in Canadian Courts whether it be in respect of an interlocutory motion, a trial or an appeal. Depending upon the circumstances involved, the Court generally awards the successful party its legal costs on one of two scales: partial indemnity (i.e. approximately 30%-50% of actual legal costs), or substantial indemnity (i.e. approximately 65%-80% of actual legal costs). In making such orders for the payment of legal costs to the successful party, the Courts in Canada discourage frivolous proceedings and encourage litigants to make and to consider reasonable offers to settle.
Good old Racehorse. Too bad you’re wrong.
Excellent news – many congratulations to Tim Ball.
Congratulations to Dr. Tim Ball!!!
Fortunately M.Mann can no longer claim to be a respectable “Nobel Laureate”
Glad to hear the news
I’m not super well informed on legal matters, but didn’t The Frontier Centre for Public Policy Inc settle with Mann and issue an apology and retraction of their defamatory claims against him? The case against Ball was part of this suit. I can only imagine that the case against Ball individually was dismissed because of that settlement. This doesn’t seem like a win for Ball to me at all.
https://twitter.com/MichaelEMann/status/1137079201863995392/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1137079201863995392&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgrist.org%2Farticle%2Fmichael-e-mann-took-climate-change-deniers-to-court-they-apologized%2F
I can only imagine that the case against Ball individually was dismissed because of that settlement.
Yes, you’ve successfully imagined such to be the case:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/22/breaking-dr-tim-ball-wins-michaelemann-lawsuit-mann-has-to-pay/#comment-2778145
This doesn’t seem like a win for Ball to me at all.
You mean because Ball petitioned the court for a dismissal on the basis of unnecessary delay on the part of Mann and the court agreed? Seems if one makes a petition to the court and it’s granted that’s clearly considered a “win” wouldn’t you agree?
wrt much of the above, a definitive account of Mann’s hockey sticks and the immoral manoeuvres of the Hockey Team are to be found in Andrew Montford’s ‘The Hockey Stick Illusion’. Challenging math, but was nearly complete when Climategate broke so the final chapter dissects that scandal in detail. AM says that he’s not surprised – the released emails from UEA and CRU are just what he expected.
I complained to the BBC about Mann being given a slot in their ridiculous TV documentary “Climate – Change the Facts” when he is known as a Disgrace to the Profession and perhaps the most discredited scientist on the planet. An insult to your taxpayers, I said. Usual self-exculpatory boiler plate came back, but I think the Beeb took a bad hit with that programme.
I too complained to the BBC, and as their responses were unsatisfactory I escalated the complaint to OFCOM. Still waiting for response but I’m not holding my breath.
Cheers Dr. Ball. Mann strike 2. Steyn’s pitch is next.
Before anyone gets excited, Ball should provide the specific judgment or court order dismissing the case. For, example, court costs could be $200 or $50,000.
JD
Very glad about this outcome. I wish Dr. Bell all the very best!
Apologies to Dr.Ball. I mispelt your name above.
What is now needed is a class action lawsuit against all these climate crackpots so that everyone can get compensated for their damages.
Congratulations Dr. Ball. I’m sure this victory came a great personal cost to you and your family but history will be very kind to you and what you accomplished here. Well done and a victory for the scientific method!
Hopefully Dr. Ball is awarded client/solicitor rather than party/party costs. If so, that would say a LOT about this case.
Apparently not.
Is that the same Michael Mann who posted in his Bio at Penn State that he was an actual RECIPIENT of the Nobel Prize that had been awarded ONLY to the teller of Inconvenient Falsehoods Albert Gore only to have to take it down and admit that he was as much a RECIPIENT as the janitor who cleans the TOILETS for the IPCC?
Wasn’t he actually awarded some sort of “consolation prize” from the disgraced U.N. scoundrel who resigned due to “allegations” of….?, well, I’ll leave it at that.
In other words, Mann didn’t (couldn’t) pursue the matter and costs were awarded to Ball. Man you are dense. You don’t know much about the law, do you?
“costs were awarded to Ball”
Evidence? Ball says Mann has to pay court costs, but as jdohio says, that could be anything from $200 up. Mann says he doesn’t have to pay anything to Ball. You asked specifically about client/solicitor costs.
I think it’s odd that a day after this banner headline, there is no further information from Ball; the only specifics are from Mann.
In BC, “costs” does not mean ‘the filing fees”. It means the costs incurred by the party in retaining legal counsel and prosecuting his action or defence, and the disbursements incurred. In this case it could be up to a hundred thousand dollars. There are a number of different scales which can be ordered, so the actual costs order could be anywhere from 2/3rds to 100% of Ball’s actual out of pocket costs, including disbursements. It will not be petty cash level.
“…I think it’s odd that a day after this banner headline, there is no further information from Ball…”
What an odd reaction and comment.
Evidence?
(Emphasis added)
File Number VLC-S-S-111913
Details for Document: Order
Date Filed: 22Aug2019
Filing Parties
Terms of Order
Order
1. Order that the claim made by Plaintiff be dismissed
2. Costs will follow the event and of the action since the action is dismissed
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08/22/breaking-dr-tim-ball-wins-michaelemann-lawsuit-mann-has-to-pay/#comment-2778415
This is how I would characterize Mr. Mann’s “rebuttal” to Dr. Ball.
Sy Kool, its been updated
Sy Kool, its been updated
Yep. I was thinking about commenting in one of your (many) other threads (you kept going on about the 20th doh!) but I figured you had this.
You’re slippin’ dood get on the Ball.
🙂
“You’re slippin’ dood get on the Ball.”
Ya I should have checked back, but I didnt see anything on the calanders either.
Nick, in Canada, “costs follow the event”. Although it is “true” that the Court did not find that Ball’s defences were valid, it also true that the Court did not find that any of Mann’s claims were valid. It also did not find that any of Mann’s claims were invalid, since it did not adjudicate on ANY CLAIMS.
Mann was required to produce his work. He was given an adjournment in the trial date from February 2017. As of mid 2018, he still had not produced for discovery, the materials which he was required to produce, and which he had undertaken to provide. In May 2019, Ball moved to dismiss the claim. I am a little surprised that it took the judge until now to release his reasons. I suspect that they are long and detailed, so as to exactly explain why he (or she) has exercised his discretion to dismiss the action for delay (most likely on the grounds that Mann was procrastinating and effectively in contempt of his undertaking to Ball, and to the Court, in refusing to produce his documentation. Mann has had lots of time to do what was required of him, so -> fail.
*Of course* Ball’s motion meant that there would be no trial. Why should Ball go to trial on what had become a slam dunk (as Mann could not prosecute his claims in the absence of his documents. But ‘no trial’ was what Mann needed. Without producing his documentation, there was no way he could afford to go to trial. Any attempt to introduce *anything* related to his work would be objected to and refused admission
“The provision in the court’s order relating to costs does not mean that I will pay Ball’s legal fees”. HAH. For a guy who has been embroiled in lawsuits for 8 years in BC, he sure does not listen to his lawyer. Mann probably thinks that the reference to ‘costs’ means the same thing as in some US Federal Court actions, where ‘costs’ means the out of pocket filing fees of a couple of hundred bucks. BZZZZT WRONG. In BC, “costs follow the event”. And that means partial or substantial indemnity for the legal fees and disbursements Ball has incurred. Since the action has been dismissed for delay, the costs award will likely be on a partial indemnity basis, so Ball should receive about 2/3rds of his actual out of pocket expenditures, including disbursements.
And Mikey Mann, the oh-so-noble Nobel Laureate, will have to pay those costs.
It appears that I was likely wrong about the timing of this, when I wrote on August 23rd at 9:57 pm.
Ball probably first *served and filed* his Motion to Dismiss, back in May. The Motion was finally heard on the 22nd. From Ball’s and Mann’s comments, the Judge delivered his decision verbally from the bench (quite possibly with written reasons to follow) and the gist was summarized in the Court system (likely entered by the Court Clerk) as set out above by Sycomputing on August 24th at 3:49pm
Since the short notation has no extra modifiers, the Judge just ordered that the costs of the Motion, and of the Action are payable by Mann, to Ball, at the usual (median) party and party level. (Without more, this would mean that the parties either agree upon the number, or an Assessment Officer will review the dockets and bills and set a number. And that can be appealed from too….).
But Mann has lost and is very highly unlikely to prevail on an appeal. He failed to do what the Rules and the Court required him to do: deliver copies of his documents to Ball, so that Ball could examine them to determine whether he, Ball, was correct in stating that Mann was a fraud *in that his calculations were fudged. Ball needed those documents to prove the truth of his alleged libel. Mann engaged in spoliation. The Court of Appeal will not look favourably on Mann.
(Note also, that had this actually gone to trial, the results of McIntyre and McKittrick’s reviews and Wegman’s report on Mann’s calculations and methodology were guaranteed to be entered into evidence. Mann was toast from day one, in trying to actually win the trial.)
Mikey Mann doesn’t think he *will* be paying Ball’s legal fees. He is ignorant or stupid. (Ignorant == does not know: Stupid == does not remember what he has been told).
Technically, Mr Mann may be correct about not paying costs. I am not aware of any means to ensure that the awarded costs come from Mr Mann’s pocket. Costs are awarded and they will (after God-knows how much argument) be paid from somewhere. Mr Mann still has (possibly embarrassed) supporters who may be reluctant to see one of their leading icons seriously damaged.
When one is well-supported by the Establishment and MSM a considerable amount of damage can be taken with remarkably little observable effect. I expect that JCU will ultimately suffer very little for their shabby treatment of Science (generally) or Mr Ridd (specifically). Power and money tend to win.
Because if Mann say it, it must be true? ROTFLOL.
You are relying on Mann’s opinion only, Nick. It appears to me that if Ball and Mann cannot agree on how much Ball will be paid by Mann, the court will make the determination. See:
https://www.sotosllp.com/2016/01/litigation-costs-in-ontario-where-the-loser-pays-and-the-winner-also-pays/
JFD
JFD
Nick has demonstrated consistently that he views the world through green-colored glasses. He has a unique capacity for putting a spin on anything, which makes it look like he and alarmists are always right, matter how many knots he has to tie his argument into. Unfortunately, his predictable behavior removes any hope that others will see him as being objective.
Dr. Ball specifically stated he was awarded court costs in his message to Anthony Watts above.
Always play the Ball and nevaaa the Mann
Mann had a partial victory. He forced Ball to jump through legal hoops for 8 years. And it might have cost Mann very little in time or money if he had his lawyers do almost all the work, subsidized by his supporters.
Great news. I donated to his legal fun way back when this started…..great investment!!!!
Well – The Science is NOT settled
but the court case is !
“There have been some wildly untruthful claims about the recent dismissal of libel litigation against Tim Ball circulating on social media. Here is our statement:
The defendant Ball did not “win” the case. The Court did not find that any of Ball’s defenses were valid. The Court did not find that any of my claims were *not* valid.
The dismissal involved the alleged exercise of a discretion on the Court to dismiss a lawsuit for delay. I have an absolute right of appeal. My lawyers will be reviewing the judgment and we will make a decision within 30 days.
The provision in the Court’s order relating to costs does NOT mean that I will pay Ball’s legal fees.
This ruling absolutely does not involve any finding that Ball’s allegations were correct in fact or amounted to legitimate comment. In making his application based on delay, Ball effectively told the world he did not want a verdict on the real issues in the lawsuit.”
Dr Mann, Facebook.
…after delay….after delay…all initiated by Mann in hopes that the court would run out of dates on its calendar as well as patience and dismiss just as it has done. Mann accepted a “Contempt of Court” ruling rather than submit his metadata, so running the clock out rather than face a complete humiliation in a ruling against him was the BEST he could hope for. Let him appeal, it just keeps the issue before the science community and gives more impetus to those who hold Mann in utter contempt. MANN-UP (pun intended) and admit defeat and admit that you falsified data to create your infamous “HORSE HOCKEY STICK” graph.
In other words, Mann has no case. He filed a SLAPP suit and it’s going to come back hard on him. And if Mann commits contempt of court again, he could end up behind bars.
P. Clarke, AKA Phil Clarke, a well known Gorebot has nothing more that repeating the Piltdown Mann’s self-serving Facebook entry.
Sad, Phil, and a little silly. Here it now, Eight More Years.
=================
However, the both of them do know a little about ‘wildly untruthful’.
=============================
Congratulations Dr. Ball. Please keep fighting the good fight.
Congratulations, Dr Ball.
I expect this result is welcome, yet small recompense for what this alleged person has put you through.
Just excellent!!! Great stuff Dr Ball.
Nice work!!
Someone with better resources should check, but I believe Mr. Mann just might be the first Nobel Prize “winner” to lose two defamation suits…
Make that chronic or serial loser.