In a dramatic turn of events, a New York state appeals court has upheld the dismissal of most of a lawsuit against global superstar Mariah Carey and her publisher, stemming from her brother’s claim that he had been unjustly portrayed as a violent figure in her 2020 memoir, “The Meaning of Mariah Carey.” This high-profile legal battle has captivated readers with its twists and perplexing arguments.
Context Matters, but It’s Missing
A four-judge panel ruled on Thursday that Mariah’s brother, Morgan Carey, argued that his defamation claims hinged on the importance of context. However, the panel noted that Morgan had not clearly defined this missing context, leaving the court without a clear understanding of how it would change the outcome of the case.
“He neither identifies the relevant context that, in his view, the court overlooked, nor explains how or why consideration of such context would have yielded a contrary result in any particular instance,” the panel emphasized, adding an air of mystique to the proceedings.
An Uphill Battle for Morgan Carey
The appeals court went on to reveal that the lower court had, at times, favored Morgan Carey by considering the context. However, his appeal failed to address the court’s rulings on special damages allegations, keeping the case shrouded in uncertainty. Morgan had not convinced the appellate panel to overturn the lower court’s ruling on his actual malice allegations against the publishers, Macmillan Publishers Ltd. unit Henry Holt & Co. and Andy Cohen Books. The panel even noted that his appeal merely echoed arguments that had already been rejected.
The ‘Personal Animus’ Mystery
One of the most perplexing elements of the case was Morgan Carey’s argument that his sister, Mariah, harbored “personal animus” towards him, which, in his view, was circumstantial evidence of actual malice. However, he failed to cite any relevant cases to support this intriguing claim, leaving the panel skeptical.
