(La Porte, IN) - A judge has reversed his decision for the third time in less than a month in a bitter civil defamation case between former La Porte County attorney Shaw Friedman and La Porte County Auditor Tim Stabosz that, ultimately, could be taken to the Indiana Supreme Court.

 

Judge Stevens Bowers from Elkhart County on Friday ordered a new trial again.

 

He was a special judge brought in to preside over the case in La Porte Circuit Court to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest since Stabosz and Friedman were both public figures at the time.

 

Friedman was the attorney for the La Porte County Commissioners in 2021 when he filed the lawsuit alleging Stabosz damaged his reputation by repeatedly claiming he ran county government by gaining control of key decision makers.

 

On June 28th, a jury sided with Stabosz, who argued his claims about Friedman were based on sufficient evidence. 

 

About three months later, Bowers agreed with Friedman in his request for a new trial.  Bowers ruled the jury was presented with incorrect information about Indiana defamation law to consider in reaching its decision.  Had the jury been given the right information, the plaintiffs argued the decision could have favored Friedman, who claimed Stabosz wanting to benefit politically, acted with malice and in reckless disregard of the truth.

 

The following week, Bowers siding with the defense and reinstated the jury’s decision.  This time, Bowers ruled he was three days late in ordering a new trial under a state mandated deadline for him to act on Friedman’s appeal within 30 days.

 

In his latest ruling, Bowers agreed with the plaintiffs who argued the new trial order should stand unless overturned by the Indiana Court of Appeals based on previous rulings by the Indiana Supreme Court on late decided cases.

 

“The appellate court gets all of the issues and then hears what everybody has to say and makes the decision,” said Bill Jonas, an attorney from South Bend representing Friedman.

 

Jonas also said any appeal will have to be filed by Stabosz, who would have the burden of proof to show why a new trial should not be ordered.

 

Andrew Jones, an attorney from South Bend representing Stabosz, offered no opinion about the judge’s latest ruling but felt it was time for a fresh set of eyes to decide what he described as a very technical matter.

 

“We’ve had so much back and forth since the trial, I think now would be an appropriate time for the court of appeals to weigh in,” he said.

 

Jones also said he was not surprised where the hotly contested legal dispute is heading.

 

“It was a situation where no matter what happened at trial, either side was likely to appeal an unfavorable verdict,” he said.

 

Jones said he anticipates the Indiana Supreme Court being asked to render a final decision by whoever loses the appellate court challenge.