CT Supreme Court To Hear Appeal In Sandy Hook Lawsuit

NEWTOWN, CT — The state Supreme Court will hear an appeal filed by Attorney Norm Pattis after his client Alex Jones was sanctioned by a trial judge in a lawsuit filed by several family members of Sandy Hook school shooting victims.

Oral arguments will be scheduled sometime in September, according to court records. Jones' on-air Infowars rant came after it was discovered that child pornography images had been sent to emails associated with Infowars. Thousands of emails were turned over en-masse during the lawsuit discovery process and a few were found to contain the lewd material.

At one point during the broadcast Jones pounded on a picture of lawyer Chris Mattei who is affiliated with the Koskoff firm. The Koskoff firm is representing family members of Sandy Hook shooting victims who are suing Jones for defamation.

Superior Court Judge Bellis sanctioned the Jones defendants by denying them the opportunity to have the case dismissed under the state’s anti-SLAPP statute, which provides a quicker route for dismissing cases that are frivolous or aimed at curtailing a person’s free speech. She also ordered Jones to pay attorney fees related to the child pornography claims.

Related: Judge Orders Alex Jones To Pay Legal Fees In Child Porn Claim

“The Court has no doubt that Alex Jones was accusing Plaintiffs' Counsel of planting child pornography,” Bellis said, according to a court transcript. She went on to chastise Jones actions during the broadcast.

Pattis wrote in his appeal application that it is the second time he is appealing to a higher court and said the discovery process in the case has amounted to a fishing expedition.

“...the Court denied the Defendants the right to pursue their special motion to dismiss on specious grounds composed of an unholy amalgam of alleged discovery violations and the base alloy of perceived threats against opposing counsel,” Pattis wrote.

Pattis argued that Jones’ rant wasn’t anywhere near a true threat and took place days after he learned that child pornography images had been embedded in emails that were turned over during the discovery process.

“The Connecticut anti-SLAPP statute was designed to enhance the freedom of the press, amplifying protected speech like a bullhorn; but in Bellis's hands, that bullhorn has become a muzzle,” Pattis said in a legal filing.

Bellis also threatened to default the Jones defendants in regards to the lawsuit discovery process if it didn’t proceed smoother in the future.

Koskoff lawyers argued in legal filing that Bellis’ actions were warranted.

“The court’s response to Jones’ attack on plaintiffs’ counsel was appropriate and necessary – it simply implemented that limited sanction and offered the plaintiffs the opportunity to seek attorney’s fees. Far from abusing its discretion, the court below showed exceptional forbearance. The Application should be denied,” they wrote.