Dead Marine's father ordered to pay protesters' legal costs

[The Minsky Moment]

Actually, I'm thinking that's why the judge ordered the family to pay the guy's legal cost.  To get diversity jurisdiction, they had to assert that that the "amount at controversy" was actually above $75,000.  If the case doesn't close out at at least that amount, the attorney that certified that can actually be sanctioned. 

That is not accurate.  It is not uncommon for a federal diversity case to conclude with damages under the jurisdictional amount.  It is only a problem if it is clear that a higher amount never was realistically at stake (e.g. a collection of a sum certain).  That plainly was not the case here - given the amount of the jury award, a lot more than $75K was potentially at stake.

I'm thinking the judge was cranky about this case wasting federal court time.

How could it possibly be a waste of time when the district judge ruled against Phelps on the First Amendment issue - is the panel suggesting that a federal district judge encouraged sanctionable behavior?   The panel's opinion is defensible - but this is by no means a clearly settled area of First Amendment law.  The fact that four Supreme Court justices decided that the panel's opinion merited review is also a strong indication that this is far from a straightforward legal issue.  The Supreme Court doesn't tend to take cases where it thinks the litigants are wasting federal court time.

[Malthus]

Ontario is a 'loser pays costs' jurisdiction, but there is always discretion to vary that given the circumstances (and assuming that the complex costs rules concerning settlement offers have not been triggered).

I'd like to think that a judge would use that discretion to deny costs in a case like this ...

[KRonn]

This is so bizarre. Waiting to see how this ultimately gets judged at the Supreme Court level.

[crazy canuck]

Ontario is a 'loser pays costs' jurisdiction, but there is always discretion to vary that given the circumstances (and assuming that the complex costs rules concerning settlement offers have not been triggered).

I'd like to think that a judge would use that discretion to deny costs in a case like this ...

A recent amendment to our Rules gives judges broad discretion to depart from the usual result of the loser paying costs.

[Martinus]

Not to belittle the family's grief, but... this doesn't really seem so outrageous on the face of it.  When you try to take someone to court for 11 million dollars for your mental suffering and their punishment, maybe you should be taking a bit of a risk...

That's not true.

He was AWARDED 11 million by the jury and then this was overturned on the appeal from the Phelpses. He should not be penalized for winning.