The legal team for Amber Heard filed a move to have the defamation decision in her high-profile trial against her ex-husband Johnny Depp overturned and the case retried.
The request was submitted on Friday by Heard’s 36-year-old defense team on the grounds that the evidence supporting the jury’s finding that she had slandered Depp, 59, was insufficient.
They also claimed that one of the jurors had not been thoroughly screened, and they questioned whether they even had the right to serve on the panel.
Heard’s attorneys argued in a 43-page memorandum that the judgment, as well as the $10 million in damages she now owes Depp, should be overturned 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, replied to the motion by stating, “What we expected, just lengthier, no more substantial,” in a statement to Courthouse News.
Heard has said that she is unable to pay the $10.35million in damages she owes Depp. Though she has previously indicated that she wants to appeal the verdict, to do so she would need to post bond of the full damages. It is likely that this latest motion was an attempt to circumvent those requirements and still take try for a new verdict.
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 service.
The complaint states, “It appears his identification could not have been established.”
Heard further contended that the jury’s decision to give Depp excessive damages was based on factors unrelated to the subject of his complaint.
The motion claims that despite Depp having “represented to the court he would limit his damages to the period Dec. 18, 2018 through November 2, 2020” – the time between Heard’s op-ed about Depp’s alleged abuse being published in the Washington Post and when a UK court found that he had abused Heard – Depp made no attempt to narrow the scope of his alleged damages within that two-year time period.
‘Mr. Depp made no such effort at any point in the trial to limit his claimed damages. Instead, even throughout the Closings, Mr. Depp continued to urge the jury to restore his reputation and legacy to his children as a result of Ms. Heard accusing Mr. Depp in May 2016 of domestic violence.’
During the most recent hearing in the case on June 24, when the judge formalized the decision in the court’s records, Judge Penney Azcarate made it apparent that she did not want the case to move ahead as it is. She rejected pleas from Heard’s legal team for more hearings.
That day, Judge Azcarate informed Heard’s team that they might request a judicial appeal if they want one.
In the June ruling, both celebrities were deemed to have slandered one another, but Depp’s hand fared better.
favor. 
While Heard only received $2 million in damages from Depp, he received $10.35 million from her. Heard owed Depp a hefty $8.35 million in total.
Heard subsequently acknowledged, via her attorney, that she was unable to pay the millions in damages, and a day after the verdict, her attorney announced that she would be appealing the decision.
However, her perspective on the matter has now shifted, and reports are spreading that she plans to write a “tell-all” book to raise money to pay for the damages.
Heard was allegedly “broke” and “in a position to turn down money,” according to a person close to her.
After a terrible few months, they said she “considers her career in Hollywood gone” and “had nothing to lose.”
Chew stated that the actor could be prepared to forego the millions of dollars in damages owing to him during an appearance on Good Morning America earlier in June if Heard agreed not to pursue an appeal.
However, Heard’s lawyers lost that chance during the June 24 hearing when they declined to make such an agreement and Azcarate finalized the verdict, leaving Heard’s only path forward in an appeal.
In order to do that though, Heard would still need to come up with the cash to post a bond for the full amount of the $10.35million while the appeal is pending – a common practice.