The Des Moines Register published “$1.25 M offer was made to end sex harassment case”, written by Brianne Pfannemstiel. The plaintiff sued the State of Iowa for sexual harassment and wrongful termination. The case proceeded to trial and both parties continued with settlement negotiations. The parties never settled, the case was submitted to a jury which then returned a verdict for $2.2 million.
SHOULD THE OFFER TO SETTLE MATTER?
Should the offer to settle for less than a jury awarded matter to the judge when evaluating whether to grant a new trial? No. An offer to settle should not matter to the judge. No new trial should be granted and the State of Iowa should fire those involved right before it pays the money to satisfy the judgment.
WHY SHOULDN’T IT MATTER?
It shouldn’t matter because what if the State of Iowa had offered $5 million and the jury returned a verdict for only $2.2 million? Should the plaintiff be given an additional $2.8 million based on the pre-verdict offer? No. The court system doesn’t work that way.
It is called buyer’s remorse and the arguments for the State of Iowa’s post-trial motion are nonsense. The judge should not waste even five seconds considering it.
WHAT TO READ
Want to read the plaintiff’s petition? Don’t miss this sexual harassment petition, it is a must-read!
Kirsten Anderson vs The State of Iowa, The Iowa Senate, The Iowa Senate Republican Caucus, State Senator Bill Dix, Eric Johansen and Ed Failor, Case No. LACL131321, Polk County, Iowa, Sexual harassment and wrongful termination. [The facts speak volumes about the outcome.]
Post a comment
Post a Comment to "Sexual Harassment, And Gambling on the Jury"To reply to this message, enter your reply in the box labeled "Message", hit "Post Message."