If they didn't lose an appeal, then the article should not say they lost an appeal.
As 144,001 said, this is incorrect information. Words matter. I just read the headline and thought they had lost an appeal...almost called my mom to tell her...thank goodness I read a little more and found out they have not lost an appeal. That would have been embarrassing to have mom tell me I don't know what I'm talking about...! Or what if I started spreading around that incorrect info on the internet? People will find it to not be true and then you and I and all the people spreading the incorrect info from your headline lose all credibility...Then your article that you put so much work into ends up doing more damage than good. Using the correct words matters. Facts, facts, facts.
It should say, "The Watchtower's motion for JNOV in the Conti Cas has been Denied, --Files Appeal of Verdict "...or something along those lines. Whatever it says, it must be factual and CLEAR because your blog is where so many people, myself included, are getting their information about this story.
As can be seen from other forum topic discussions, being a JW attorney poses several doctrinal problems. The GB members preach against prolonged university study and to become a practicing attorney the law student must eventually take an oath. Some research indicates that the WTS law staff includes staff members who became attorneys before they became JWs - or it would appear. Ms. Carolyn Wah would be an example, since she has proudly cited her Catholic parochial school education elsewhere - suggesting a career route: don't be a born in, especially if you are a woman. But this also means that the WTS is hostage to market forces if they really want the representation required.
I personally know of one person raised a JW who went to school for the expressed purpose of becomeing a lawyer for the Organization. I think, but I'm not totally sure, that the Org actually paid for his law school.