Trial date set for Samantha Markle’s lawsuit against Meghan Markle

Another tentative trial date has been set in Samantha Markle’s defamation lawsuit against her estranged half-sister Meghan – though the case could still be tossed or settled before next year.

A federal judge in Florida scheduled the trial to start on Nov. 4, 2024 and it would be expected to last about five days, according to legal papers filed earlier this month.

The new date is the result of an amended suit filed by Samantha as her original defamation case against the Duchess of Sussex was tossed earlier this year.

Samantha, 58, claims Meghan, 42, defamed her when she told Oprah during a bombshell 2021 interview with Prince Harry that she “grew up as an only child” and didn’t have much of a relationship with Samantha, the amended complaint states.

The updated lawsuit contends Meghan’s statements damaged Samantha’s reputation and the credibility of the book the older-sister wrote titled “The Diary of Princess Pushy’s Sister Part 1” that details the half-siblings’ relationship when they were younger.

Samantha is seeking $75,000 in damages.

The initial legal action brought against Meghan in March 2022 was thrown out when US District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell wrote in her order that Meghan’s remarks were opinions and “not capable of being proven false.”

Lawyers for both sides argued in front of Judge Honeywell earlier this month over whether the case tied to the amended complaint should move forward.

Peter Ticktin, the lawyer for Samantha, told Newsweek he feels confident the case won’t be dismissed this time around.

“Once I explained how and why Meghan did what she did, to discourage readers from reading Samantha’s book which was titled with the name ‘Princess Pushy’ in it, the whole case made more sense,” he said.

Speaking to reporters outside court, Samantha, who suffers from multiple sclerosis and uses a wheelchair, said she was “optimistic” about her case.

Meghan’s attorney Michael Kump has called Samantha’s case baseless.

“This has always been a lawsuit in search of a viable claim,” said Klump. “The case has failed because it runs head first up against defamation law and the First Amendment.”