Jury finds Goop queen Gwyneth Paltrow not responsible for ski crash

Having countersued the optometrist that hit her on the ski slope, Paltrow will receive $1 plus legal fees in damages in trial

Aux News Gwyneth Paltrow
Jury finds Goop queen Gwyneth Paltrow not responsible for ski crash
Gwyneth Paltrow in the role of defendant Photo: Rick Bowmer-Pool

Whatever the vibes are that emanate from the products in the Goop catalog, they must really work—at least on juries. Gwyneth Paltrow, the woman responsible for putting “vagina eggs” into the national discourse, walked out of court a winner on Thursday after a jury decided she was not responsible for a crash on the ski slopes in Utah.

For those who have doom-scrolled past the words “Gwyneth,” “ski,” “drawings,” and “court” over the past few days, the trial in Park City, Utah, stemmed from a 2016 accident between Paltrow and optometrist Terry Sanderson, who sued the Oscar-winner for $300,000. Paltrow countersued for $1 (plus court fees).

Sanderson argued that the crash left him with broken ribs and brain damage from a concussion that impacted his daily life. NBC News reports that Paltrow remembers it differently, testifying that she believed she was being assaulted. The actress insisted that she quickly dismissed the idea, but it didn’t weaken her resolve. “Mr. Sanderson categorically hit me on the ski slope, and that is the truth,” she testified.

Of course, being that the trial was about one of America’s most famous and bizarre stars, there were also moments where lawyers prodded Paltrow on her friendship with Taylor Swift and whether or not her Jimmy Kimmel interviews were truthful. It’s hard to believe they lost this one.

The trial began earlier this month, but Sanderson launched his suit in 2019 for $3.1 milliona judge later ruled that he could only sue for $300,000. However, the only eye-witness to come forward was Craig Ramone, whom Paltrow accused of lying on the stand, claimed he was “40 feet way” and “color blind.”

31 Comments

  • happyinparaguay-av says:

    IMO the smoking gun was that Sanderson had previously suffered a stroke and complained about the same symptoms. Makes his account seem suspicious as hell.

    • pandorasmittens-av says:

      That and he and the only eyewitness (who was known to him) swore under oath that they didn’t know who allegedly ran into him until far later, while text messages while they were still at the resort explicitly state that they knew Paltrow was the other party involved, and that she left early because her son had suffered an unrelated injury. Or the part where video/ witness accounts placed him as the uphill skier, meaning he’s at fault due to visibility the same way that someone that rear ends you can be at fault despite you abruptly hitting the brakes. This rich dude knew exactly what he was trying to do with this lawsuit, and the folks frothing at the mouth to punish the white lady bought it whole hog.

      • mytvneverlies-av says:

        he’s at fault due to visibilitySpeaking of, he earlier claimed he’s nearly blind in one eye, and impaired in the other, due to the aforementioned stroke (I think).

    • frasier-crane-av says:

      IMO the final nail in the coffin was Sanderson going on a QAnon/Epstein mini-rant, completely exposing his unhinged lunacy.

    • sarcastro7-av says:

      Also that she’s so light and airy that you couldn’t possibly get hurt in a collision with her, regardless of who collided into who.

      • bcfred2-av says:

        Yeah I’m leaning more into the idea that this is a 70+ year-old guy who maybe bounced off of her and hurt himself in the fall.  Overall seems like a standard-issue on-slope collision where no one is necessarily at fault.

  • coatituesday-av says:

    In other legal news, and I know this site doesn’t get too political, Donald Trump was just indicated. That’s what he typed. Strong men come up to him with tears in their eyes, saying “sir, your such a good spellor!”

  • waylon-mercy-av says:

    Paltrow could have took him for all he’s worth in the counter sue. Could have destroyed him, and she knew it. But in her benevolence, she showed him mercy. That one dollar better be a dollar he never forgets

    • dutchmasterr-av says:

      He might forget the dollar, but I’m sure the final total of her legal fees will leave a mark. 

      • specialcharactersnotallowed-av says:

        In true AV Club fashion, the headline (or subhead, in this case) and the article say very different things. “Court fees” will sting a bit. “Legal fees” could ruin him.

      • mcortez-av says:

        Exactly, rich & famous Hollywood actors & actresses aren’t known for hiring bargain basement priced law firms.  Unless the court limits the legal fees, they may well exceed the amount Sanderson was sueing for …

      • bcfred2-av says:

        For sure.  They’re probably as much if not more than what he was asking in damages.

  • thefilthywhore-av says:

    Oof, this is going to set a bad precedent where celebrities think they can intentionally ski into people with impunity.

  • ohnoray-av says:

    I saw Evan Ross Katz refer to the characters at this trial as something out of a Christopher Guest movie, and it was so accurate. I’m sad it’s over.

  • monochromatickaleidoscope-av says:

    I have to say, I didn’t pay attention to the trial at all, but I did assume that Paltrow would win, or at least that she was not at fault. Just because it would be so crazy for her to go through all of this, sign up for this terrible publicity and all this junk if she actually hit some old guy and hurt him badly.I don’t know her, maybe she’s completely insane, but I just feel like if she seriously injured some guy through reckless behavior, she’d just pay the guy his $300,000 so he goes away and stays out of the news. There are a lot of celebrities who would gladly pay just to avoid a news cycle like this, forget about them and their family members being deposed and publicly cross examined.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share Tweet Submit Pin