Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Gwyneth Paltrow ski crash trial PM


I did not go into details about knowing this case. Basically Gwyneth Paltrow won her case against a 76 years old optometrist after a ski crash. So now he owes her $1 and her legal fees (probably in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars).

from Wikipedia: In January 2019, retired optometrist Terry Sanderson sued Paltrow for $3.1 million, claiming that three years earlier she collided with him on a ski slope at Deer Valley Resort in Park City, Utah, causing him permanent traumatic brain injury.[199] Paltrow counter-sued Sanderson that February, claiming that he was the one who crashed into her. She sought a symbolic one dollar in damages, as well as repayment of her legal fees.[200][201] The $3.1 million lawsuit was dismissed, but Sanderson then claimed damages for $300,000. This second lawsuit began in March 2023, and on March 30, the jury found that Paltrow was not at fault, Sanderson was at fault, and awarded Paltrow $1 in damages.[202][203][204]

And after she won she delivers the final blow, a huge power move:

"I wish you well"

So she tried to paint herself as a victim (maybe it's really the case, I don't know the exact claim, just know he still suffers from these injuries apparently and we will never know what really happened. I heard a witness who says she skied into him and then yelled at him. Anyway...), then asks $1 to show she's there only to clear her name, she wins and then wishes him well. To me, that's great social strategy and at the same time it's nasty: she's worth $200 million apparently. So she's part of the ultra-elite, much richer than him, his reputation is tarnished and now she's wishing him well. To me that's a bit too much. She did well for her image: the pure Gwyneth Paltrow image. However, to behave as an eagle I would have said it privately or nothing at all. The man lost and you're pushing his nose into his debilitated health. I trust that the trial was probably fair so I would trust the conclusion. It's the image thing that I find fishy. Maybe he deserved it if he was guilty in the first place and knew about it. This whole "I sue you you sue me" thing is fishy in the first place.

Lucio Buffalmano, Jack and Mehdi ELK have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJackMehdi ELK

Hey John,

This was a very interesting case, seems to me the that the optometrist had nothing much to lose and had everything to gain even if he lost, he got good publicity, for well about seven years and may be for a few more years as well, Paltrow played it the case very smart, making it seem like a matter of principle whereas the optometrist made it about the money rather than justice. Which already casts his intention into the grey area.

And after she won she delivers the final blow, a huge power move:

"I wish you well"

I don't think it was a power move, It's a situation of "damned if I do-Damned if I don't"  rich people double bind that they find themselves in, if she stayed silent it could be construed as  her not even having the grace to talk to him, if she said anything else it might have construed otherwise, I look at it like a tennis match, both played the game, one won, the other lost, the winner said "I wish you well"

Happy to hear your thoughts on this


Lucio Buffalmano, John Freeman and 2 other users have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJohn FreemanJackMehdi ELK

Yeah I agree with both!

Lucio Buffalmano and Maverick have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoMaverick

I did watch a few videos on this case to learn a bit about persuasion/social strategies.

And it was quite shocking to see how "not-so-good" some lawyers are, to go use a euphemism -his lawyers, of course-.
The cross-examination of his female lawyer to Paltrow was embarrassing-level poor.

The picture I got is that he was in the wrong and was trying to get some money from her, but I wouldn't put my hand on the fire on that.
At the very least, he came across as a lier/turkey (from the little I've seen).

However, I agree Paltrow's strategy was very smart: getting more money out of him would have been little peanuts for her, so going for 1$ was smart even from a purely financial point of view because she's got businesses tied to her name.
Even if she wanted revenge, she got it because I'd bet her lawyer will be very expensive for him to pay.
And this was great free publicity for a Hollywood star who wasn't getting many more top movies, as far as I know.

The "I wish you well" also feels like a major power move to me.

And albeit until then, from the little I've seen, I was sympathizing for her, I agree with John: that last line cast some doubts and made her come across a bit too nasty in my eyes.

John Freeman, Jack and Maverick have reacted to this post.
John FreemanJackMaverick
Check the forum guidelines for effective communication.
(Book a call) for personalized & private feedback

The I wish you well  power move explained by the comedian Tim Dillon.

Lucio Buffalmano, John Freeman and Maverick have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJohn FreemanMaverick

Very interesting Jack, the social perspective on it. That's a way of talking from the super-powerful/super-rich when they don't actually care. It's a show: they show that they care. It does not mean they do. Thanks!

Jack has reacted to this post.
Scroll to Top