Meghan Markle was initially victorious in court after Samantha brought a case accusing her of making “disparaging” comments about her during interviews.

Meghan Markle could be forced to once again face her half-sister Samantha in court, as the 59-year-old’s lawyers are preparing an attempt to overturn the verdict which saw Meghan emerge victorious.

In Meghan and Prince Harry’s interview with Oprah Winfrey the Duchess claimed she was principally raised as an only child, adding that Samantha only changed her surname back to Markle “when I started dating Harry”.

Lawyers for Samantha Markle argued in a civil lawsuit that these comments were “disparaging, hurtful, and false” and implied that Meghan’s sister was “a stranger, a liar, and… [a] deceptive fame-seeking imposter with avaricious intentions”.

Although the Duchess of Sussex won in court, Samantha Markle has now taken the lawsuit to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeal, where her lawyers have been given a July deadline for filing their initial brief.

A court filing shown to Newsweek has shown where the latest battle lines will be drawn, as it reads: “Cumulative inferences and remarks made by [Meghan] have caused a cumulative meaning, which the court did not consider.”

Lawyers for Samantha Markle argued in a civil lawsuit that these comments were “disparaging, hurtful, and false” and implied that Meghan’s sister was “a stranger, a liar, and… [a] deceptive fame-seeking imposter with avaricious intentions”.

Although the Duchess of Sussex won in court, Samantha Markle has now taken the lawsuit to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeal, where her lawyers have been given a July deadline for filing their initial brief.

A court filing shown to Newsweek has shown where the latest battle lines will be drawn, as it reads: “Cumulative inferences and remarks made by [Meghan] have caused a cumulative meaning, which the court did not consider.”

Meghan Markle won a court case against her half-sister Samantha. 

This essentially means that Samantha Markle’s lawyers will attempt to argue that the judge in the original case analysed Meghan’s remarks in isolation without considering the cumulative effect they could have.

In Meghan and Harry’s Netflix documentary series, the Duchess made a comment which has been cited in the case: “I was with my mom during the week and with my dad on the weekends.

“And my dad lived alone, he had two adult children who had moved out of his house.

“I don’t remember seeing her [Samantha] when I was a kid at my dad’s house, if and when they would come around.”

The Sussexes have spoken out publicly about their families. 

Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell originally dismissed the case, as she stated that Meghan “barely mentions [Samantha], to say only that at some point during [Meghan’s] childhood, [Samantha] moved out of her father’s house.

“It is not plausible that [Samantha] would be exposed to hatred, ridicule, or contempt as a result of this statement.”

However, lawyers for Meghan’s half-sister will try to claim that the Duchess was trying to “construct a broader attack” across a series of different interviews.

Lawyers for the Duchess of Sussex have indicated they will fight the appeal by arguing the judge followed normal procedure in what they view as a routing libel case.