A jury in Alabama on Thursday awarded $9.25 million in damages after finding that The New York Times defamed a college basketball player by incorrectly reporting that he was at the scene of a fatal shooting in Tuscaloosa.

Kai Spears, who played for the University of Alabama men's basketball team and is the son of longtime NBA reporter Marc Spears, sued the Times in 2023 after the newspaper published a report, citing a person familiar with the investigation, that indicated he was a passenger in a car involved in the shooting. The Times reported that the person had spoken "on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters." Days later, the Times acknowledged its error in an editor's note and corrected the story.

The case stems from a January 2023 shooting near the University of Alabama campus in Tuscaloosa that killed a 23-year-old mother, identified in extensive news coverage of the case as Jamea Jonae Harris. Three other basketball players from the school were present at the scene of the shooting. One of them, Darius Miles, was charged with capital murder in the killing, while another, Brandon Miller, was never charged and went on to become the No. 2 pick in the 2023 NBA draft.

In his lawsuit, Spears claimed the inaccurate reporting had caused him emotional distress and had forever linked him with a murder.

The eight-person jury delivered its verdict after a nine-day trial in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

Matt Glover, an attorney for Spears, said he was pleased with the decision and believes "this verdict will improve journalism throughout the country."

The Times was reviewing its legal options after losing in court, spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander said. Those options typically include post-trial motions asking the judge to overturn or reduce the damages, with any appeal to be heard by the Atlanta-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

"We're disappointed the jury found The Times liable for an honest mistake," Stadtlander said in a statement Thursday. "We thank the jury for its service, but believe the verdict and award of damages are contrary to law and not supported by the evidence."

The verdict is a rare legal setback for the newspaper. A Times article reporting on the outcome Thursday said the paper "had not lost a defamation lawsuit brought in the United States over one of its articles in more than 50 years."

That record owes much to New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, the landmark 1964 Supreme Court ruling that grew out of an Alabama official's libel suit against the paper and requires public officials and public figures to prove "actual malice" — publication with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth — to win defamation claims. Private figures often face a lower bar under state law, such as negligence. The Times's most recent defamation trial before this one, Sarah Palin's suit over a 2017 editorial, ended in the paper's favor in 2022.

The Alabama verdict also lands amid continuing debate over those protections, with some Supreme Court justices calling in recent years for reconsidering Sullivan's actual-malice standard and press-freedom groups warning that large damages awards can chill newsroom reporting.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com.

Related coverage: The New York Times, AP News, AP News.