Opinion ID: 2622669
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Dr. Jensen's Closing Argument

Text: ¶113 We next turn our attention to yet another resource which could reasonably be counted on to provide clues about the evidentiary basis for Dr. Jensen's claim of economic loss, his closing argument to the jury. Our review of the closing arguments uncovered no reference to evidence that might support a finding of damages for the third broadcast. Instead, Dr. Jensen's counsel argued that as a result of the [first] newscast Dr. Jensen was fired from FirstMed, causing Dr. Jensen damage. Counsel also told the jury that as a result of the first broadcast Dr. Jensen no longer had IHC privileges. Counsel then stated that his experts demonstrated a substantial drop in gross income during 1995 and that it takes more work to earn the same amount of money in nursing homes, but he articulates no link anywhere between the third broadcast and the damage. This is because all the experts and damage figures relate to Dr. Jensen's removal from the IHC panel, which took place in 1995. No figures were tied directly to the third broadcast, which is the only broadcast we review. The record confirms this characterization of the evidence.