Gwyneth Paltrow denies skiing collision in lawsuit
Court adjourned until Monday
The actress was sued for $300,000 by a man who claims she crashed into him while skiing, leaving him concussed and with broken ribs. She rejects the allegation, her lawyer describing it as “utter BS”. Watch the proceedings live from court in the stream below.
Court has now adjourned until Monday.
Thank you for following along as we brought you all the live updates on the case against Gwyneth Paltrow today.
Gwyneth Paltrow questioned by Terry Sanderson’s lawyer
Terry Sanderson’s lawyer Kristin Van Orman steps forward to ask Gwyneth Paltrow her final questions.
She queries Paltrow’s earlier comment that she likes to keep a low profile while skiing.
“Is screaming at the top of your lungs profanities at [Terry] Sanderson while he’s on the ground keeping a low profile?”
“After an incident like that where you feel hurt and violated, unfortunately adrenaline can take over, and emotion as well,” Paltrow replies.
Gwyneth Paltrow’s lawyer defends “symbolic $1” counterclaim
Steve Owens, Gwyneth Paltrow’s lawyer, touches again on the “symbolic $1” that Gwyneth Paltrow is countersuing for.
He asks Paltrow whether the $1 she seeks “takes into account” that ski instructor Eric Christiansen was distracted from his job for a while following the 2016 collision – implying that it resulted in him losing pay.
“I haven’t quantified… what a Deer Valley ski instructor makes per hour, but I think it’s more than $1,” she replies.
When asked if she lost more than $1 as a result of the collision, Paltrow says “I did”.
Gwyneth Paltrow denies accusations made by Craig Ramon
Gwyneth Paltrow denies that her ski instructor Eric Christiansen “yelled” at Terry Sanderson following the collision.
This was a claim made earlier this week by Craig Ramon – an “acquaintance” of Mr Sanderson who says he witnessed the crash – during his evidence.
The Hollywood star said Mr Christiansen has been “incredibly patient and sweet” when teaching her son to ski in the past.
Paltrow also denied that she expected Mr Christiansen to falsify any paperwork for her after the 2016 incident.
She agrees that she “stuck around” after the incident, and denies the incident was a “hit-and-run” by her.
Gwyneth Paltrow questioned by her own lawyer
Terry Sanderson’s lawyer Kristin Van Orman finishes her questioning, so we’re now hearing from Gwyneth Paltrow’s lawyer Steve Owens.
He starts with a simple question: “Who hit who?”
“Mr Sanderson hit me,” she replies.
“But I did not cause the accident so I cannot be at fault for anything that subsequently happened to him.”
Gwyneth Paltrow rejects comparison to Taylor Swift case
Gwyneth Paltrow denies that she is counterclaiming for $1 because US singer Taylor Swift brought a similar “symbolic” lawsuit in the past.
“I had not been familiar with it but I now am,” she said, when asked if she knew about Ms Swift’s case.
“It’s an actual dollar that I’m asking for. It’s symbolic because the damages would actually be more.”
Asked if she and Ms Swift are friends, she replies: “I would not say we’re good friends, we are friendly… but we don’t talk very often.”
Court back in session
The court is now back in session.
Gwyneth Paltrow is still on the stand, being asked questions by Kristin Van Orman, a member of Terry Sanderson’s legal counsel.
The court has once again paused for a short break.
Gwyneth Paltrow defends actions following collision
Gwyneth Paltrow is asked whether she made an effort to check if Terry Sanderson was OK after the 2016 incident.
“When you’re the victim of a crash your psychology is not thinking about the person who perpetrated it”, the star said.
She confirms she learnt of Mr Sanderson’s broken rib through evidence heard in court.
“Isn’t it true this was an accident you caused?” a lawyer for Mr Sanderson asks.
The star is then asked if she was “accident prone” which prompts her lawyers to object before heading to the judge’s bench for a discussion.
Paltrow says she doesn’t know how Craig Ramon – an “acquaintance” of Terry Sanderson who says he witnessed the crash – “can be positive of what he saw”.
“I don’t believe that he saw what he thinks he saw,” she says.
She also accuses Mr Ramon of ‘changing’ his story.
“If you have two people with ski gear with helmets on and you’re 40-plus feet away, I don’t know how you can discern who is who.”
“I can tell you that he didn’t because Mr Sanderson categorically hit me on the ski slope.”