Carter Page Loses Bid to Revive Defamation Case Over Russia Ties

Carter Page, a onetime political adviser to former President Donald Trump, is unable to pursue defamation litigation over Yahoo News and Huffington Post articles describing a federal investigation into his potential contacts with Russian officials, Delaware’s top court ruled Wednesday.

A divided state supreme court upheld a decision by Delaware Superior Court Judge Craig A. Karsnitz, who dismissed Page’s claims, which concerned media portrayals of the law enforcement probe and the so-called “Steele dossier” documenting Trump’s suspected ties to Russia.

Chief Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr., writing for the state high court, said the article at the crux of the case—by Yahoo News reporter Michael Isikoff—was either completely truthful or, “at a minimum,” conveyed a true “gist,” even if it included some “minor” or “irrelevant” incorrect statements.

“At bottom, the point of the Isikoff article is that there was substantial federal investigation into Page and the Trump campaign’s Russia ties” and that the Steele dossier “was being investigated by U.S. intelligence agencies,” Seitz wrote. “This is true.”

‘Kraken’ Attorney Gets Win

The lawsuit, filed in 2020, targeted Oath Inc., the former name of the Verizon Communications Inc. subsidiary that operated the Yahoo and AOL brands. The Verizon media unit was sold to Apollo Global Management Inc. for $5 billion last year.

Karsnitz held in February 2021 that Isikoff’s story was “substantially true,” while several other articles based on it were shielded by the high liability bar for defamation claims brought by public figures like Page, whether or not they contained inaccuracies.

The ruling came two months after the judge removed “Kraken” attorney L. Lin Wood from the case, slamming his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and blaming his inflammatory tweets, in part, for inciting the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Delaware’s justices unanimously overturned that decision Wednesday. Although Karsnitz had the right to ask Wood to account for his actions, the judge acted improperly by canceling a hearing, denying Wood’s request to withdraw from the case, and removing him instead, the court found.

“The Superior Court’s revocation order is based on factual findings for which there is no support in the record,” some of which were “questionable,” such as the “insinuation that Wood was at least partially responsible for” the Capitol insurrection, the justices wrote.

Truth of Steele Dossier Not Relevant

But the court divided over Page’s defamation claims. The majority rejected his argument that the Isikoff article used “technically true” statements to convey the false narrative that he was colluding with Russian officials to influence the 2016 presidential election. Page was never criminally charged.

“It is also not our role to determine whether the information in the Steele dossier is true or false,” Seitz wrote.

The article’s description of a “multi-pronged investigation” included confirmation from “various individuals,” he noted.

“Far from being a mere republication of libelous matter, these are true statements,” Seitz wrote. “And the gist of the article is that there was a serious federal investigation into Page, which is also true.”

The court dismissed as far-fetched Page’s theories about a conspiracy among interconnected media and political figures to tarnish Trump by concocting the Russia investigation from thin air.

Justices Tamika R. Montgomery-Reeves, Gary F. Traynor, and James T. Vaughn Jr. joined the ruling.

‘Opposition Research’

Justice Karen L. Valihura dissented, citing Page’s allegations about a “collusive arrangement” among Hillary Clinton supporters to spread the Russian influence story.

It’s “reasonably conceivable” the Isikoff article misled readers by describing the Steele dossier as an “intelligence report” created by “a well-placed Western intelligence source,” rather than “opposition research,” Valihura said.

Oath Inc. is represented by Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP and Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP. Page is represented by Bellew LLC, Hemmer DeFrank Wessels PLLC, and Miller Keffer & Pedigo PLLC.

The case is Page v. Oath Inc., Del., No. 79, 2021, 1/19/22.