Recent Jury Verdicts and Settlements
Published by Eric A. Welter on April 7, 2011
Our latest update on recent jury verdicts and settlements after the break. OR – A jury found in favor of Oregon State Hospital in a race discrimination suit brought by a former hospital worker who alleged he was wrongfully terminated because of his race. CO – A former teacher reached a settlement with the school district […]
Our latest update on recent jury verdicts and settlements after the break.
OR – A jury found in favor of Oregon State Hospital in a race discrimination suit brought by a former hospital worker who alleged he was wrongfully terminated because of his race.
CO – A former teacher reached a settlement with the school district in a race discrimination suit that resulted in a $303,178 jury verdict in favor of the teacher. The verdict was vacated as part of the settlement.
NY – A federal judge reduced a $450,000 verdict against the city of Syracuse to $50,000 in a sex discrimination and retaliation suit brought by a community service officer who alleged she was retaliated against for complaining about discrimination.
CA – A former employee of a packing company was awarded $1.27 million in an age discrimination and harassment suit brought against the company.
KY – A federal jury found in favor of Oldham County Ambulance Taxing District in a sexual harassment suit brought by a former paramedic who alleged she was propositioned and sexually harassed by her boss.
AZ – The Ninth Circuit affirmed a jury verdict awarding the plaintiff $15,000 in compensatory damages and $50,000 in punitive damages in a hostile work environment suit against the employer, AutoZone, Inc.
MA – A federal jury awarded $15,000 to a female golfer who alleged she was discriminated against by a Cape Cod golf course when it refused to let her play in a men’s tournament with her father.
CA – A Los Angeles jury awarded $3,520,000 to the plaintiffs in a lending discrimination class action suit brought against Wells Fargo Bank. The class consisted of 880 borrowers who received loans at branch locations in minority communities. The evidence showed that the minority branches were precluded from offering the same loan discounts to borrowers that non-minority branches were offering.Topics: Jury Verdicts