Amber Heard files to appeal to the ruling in her defamation case against Johnny Depp.

Amber Heard files to appeal to the ruling in her defamation case against Johnny Depp.

After being forced to pay her ex-husband over $10 million in damages, Amber Heard formally filed an appeal in her defamation case against Johnny Depp.

According to court documents obtained by DailyMail.com, the 36-year-old actress’ attorneys appealed the civil case on Thursday in Fairfax County, Virginia.

The action was taken just one week after Heard’s appeal for a fresh trial was turned down.

At the conclusion of a contentious six-week trial, Heard was forced to pay Depp $10.35 million in damages in June after a jury found that the Pirates of the Caribbean actor had been slandered in a newspaper opinion piece written in 2018.

Depp, 59, received a total payout of $15 million, including $5 million in punitive damages and $10 million in compensatory damages.

Later, the judge set the maximum allowable damages for the state at $350,000, leaving Depp with a total recovery of $8.35 million.

Heard, in comparison, only succeeded in one of her three countersuit claims, which was connected to Depp’s attorney’s comments that suggested Heard and her companions had wrecked their flat before calling the police.

Out of the $100 million she sought in compensatory damages, the jury finally gave her just $2 million, and punitive damages were not given.

Heard’s attorneys had earlier this month requested that the court in the case throw out the verdict and declare a mistrial, contending that one of the jurors should not have been qualified to serve since his summons was meant for his father, who shared the same name and residence.

According to Judge Penny Azcarate, the jury’s decision should remain because there was “no indication of fraud or misconduct” on the part of the juror.

She added that at the beginning of the trial, all potential jurors had been questioned and accepted by both parties.

According to Azcarate, “due process was promised and delivered to all parties in this action.”

The argument made by Heard’s attorneys in the 43-page memorandum was that the jury’s decision should be overturned, along with the $10 million in damages Heard now owes Depp, because Depp “proceeded solely on a defamation by implication theory, abandoning any claims that Ms. Heard’s statements were actually false” during the trial.

Ben Chew, Depp’s primary attorney, responded to the motion by saying, “What we expected, just lengthier, no more substantive,” in a statement to Courthouse News.

Additionally, Heard has stated that she is unable to pay Depp the $10.35 million in damages she owes.

She has previously stated that she intends to appeal the decision, but in order to do so, she would have to put up a bond equal to the whole amount of the damages.

This most recent motion was probably an attempt to get around those criteria while still pursuing a new judgment.

The motion questioned the legitimacy of the jury selection procedure by bringing up Juror 15, whose birth year was 1945 according to court documents.

According to the complaint, Juror 15 “was plainly born after 1945.”

He appears to have been born in 1970, according to information that is readily available to the public.

This disparity begs the question of whether Juror 15 was properly screened by the court to serve on the jury and whether he or she ever got a summons for jury duty.

The complaint states, “It appears his identification could not have been established.”

Depp, 59, had sued Heard, claiming that she had defamed him by referring to herself in an opinion piece that appeared in The Washington Post as “a public figure symbolizing domestic abuse.”

Depp asserted that Heard, 36, was the one who started acting violently in their relationship and denied punching her.

Heard countersued, alleging that Depp slandered her when his attorney referred to her allegations as a “hoax.

“On one of Heard’s counterclaims, the jury decided to pay $2 million in damages to her.

Heard said she only hit Depp in self- or sister-defense.