The Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a jury award for defamation and tossed a claim of unjust enrichment against the estate of Chris Kyle, the bestselling author of “American Sniper.” On June 13, 2016, a majority of the three-judge panel held that the plaintiff, former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura, improperly referenced Kyle’s insurance policy during the trial. This decision reversed a jury award of $1.85 million against former U.S. Navy SEAL Kyle. The court ordered a new trial on the defamation claim; but, found no basis to award Ventura for the unjust enrichment claim.
In Kyle’s bestselling memoir, Kyle claimed that he punched a man named “Scruff Face” in a California bar after the funeral of a SEAL. According to Kyle, Scruff Face criticized the Iraq War and former U.S. President George W. Bush to the SEALs. Further, Kyle wrote that “Scruff Face” had said SEALs “deserved to lose a few.” After Scruff Face took a swing at Kyle, the SEAL “laid him out.”
While running publicity for his book, Kyle identified Scruff Face as Jesse Ventura. Ventura, a former SEAL and pro-wrestler, argued that Kyle ruined his reputation among the SEAL community. Further, Ventura claimed that Kyle’s book shot to the bestseller’s list following Kyle’s interview about the confrontation. According to Ventura, he was at the bar the day in question, but this fight did not occur.
During the jury trial, the plaintiff’s attorneys improperly questioned two witnesses and made inappropriate remarks during closing statements. The legal team questioned Harper Collins’ employees (American Sniper’s publisher) whether they were aware that HarperCollins had bought an insurance policy that would cover libel and defamation claims against Kyle. According to the Eight Circuit, these questions were used to make it appear that witnesses for Kyle were biased.
Chief Judge William Riley wrote in his holding, “given Ventura’s repeated efforts to introduce evidence of HarperCollin’s and Kyle’s insurance at trial, it is difficult to see how Ventura’s counsel’s comments were anything other than a deliberate strategic choice to try to influence and enhance damages by referencing an impersonal deep-pocket insurer.” According to the Eighth Circuit, Kyle was denied a fair trial because of these remarks and held that a new trial on the defamation claim was necessary.