EstronHawkKing
Well-Known Member
Not sure on this, there are so many in the athletic dept that have come forward and said how awful Meyer's was. She sounds like she was a cancer to the dept.
1.4 million to Jane (I assume Tracey will now get a check instead of a trial)
- Thread starter Joshbrown
- Start date
SwirlinLingerie
Well-Known Member
I'm surprised by some of these comments. You have a very successful coach who was fired with some pretty circumstantial evidence, in my opinion. You also have a long-standing senior associate who had received very favorable job reviews. Anyone who had issues with her performance didn't even bother to put it in an email. From a juror's perspective, it's unclear if any of these issues actually existed or were ever brought to the employee's attention. Not only that, it appears that her colleagues were either A). intentionally avoiding an email/paper trail with comments about her, or B). were making these things up after the fact, many of which would improve/solidify their own job standing. In other words, why side against your current boss in court?
I'd be interested in who ultimately made the decision for the university not to settle. I'd think he/she would have demanded to see all evidence before making that decision. Seems like taking on a lot of risk with little documentation to support you.
I'd be interested in who ultimately made the decision for the university not to settle. I'd think he/she would have demanded to see all evidence before making that decision. Seems like taking on a lot of risk with little documentation to support you.
EstronHawkKing
Well-Known Member
Now Meyers is going to sue for another 2 million and her lawyers want an investigation into the Iowa athletic dept, plus they still have to deal with Griesbaum's case. This is not good at all for the University of Iowa. If they lose all three cases, it's gonna look really, really bad. Yeah, someone will probably get fired, and I bet this is exactly what Meyers and Griesbaum want. Barta ended their careers at Iowa, now they are trying to turn the table and end his. This is revenge.
tksirius
HN's Love Doctor
Agree 100%.
tksirius
HN's Love Doctor
Joshbrown
Well-Known Member
The U has to be very delicate in how they remove Barta. He would probably sue, claiming to be a scape-goat who was wrongfully terminated. And I'm not joking when I say that. If he wants to keep his job, he needs to develop a very close relationship with this guy . . .
hagarwood
Well-Known Member
When there is a conflict in a department, the vast majority side with the most powerful person. There will no doubt be a serious house cleaning and those who stay will make the adjustment. Dr. Lopiano's report was pretty damning and the University didn't have a lot to fight back with. Sadly Iowa is probably better off then the vast majority of schools, but this was certainly a black eye they don't need.
Blood in the water.... Is the school able to appeal or is that it? The school if they want to save any face (if that's even possible at this point) is to start negotiating a settlement with the rest of what's thrown at them. Let a little bit of time go by before negotiating Bartas not so subtle kick out the door and begin the moving on process. That new president has hardly been on the job and this is what he's gotta clean up? So yeah I expect a full house cleaning within a year tops.
lightning1
Well-Known Member
Barta has no credibility. He told me a lie, so I have to assume he has lied to others. He needs to kick rocks.
HawksandJays
New Member
To answer several questions: 1) if plaintiff wins a discrimination case, she can recover reasonable attorney's fees and defined court costs; this is usually an hourly rate times the number of hours for the lawyers involved ---she had 2 trial lawyers and may have had others helping behind the scenes on legal issues, motions, etc; this is decided by Judge and then added to the judgment. This may be the reference to the $2 Million. It is not a separate lawsuit, but is a post-trial decision by the Judge 2) The U can ask for a new trial or for a decision by the Judge to find that the verdict was not supported by enough evidence and to overturn the verdict. This request is made to the Judge as part of post-trial actions, and is usually decided before the attorney fee issue in case the court overturns the verdict; 3) If Judge upholds the verdict, then the U can appeal to the Iowa supreme court which can decide to hear the case or refer it to the Court of Appeals to decide.4) The Judge may also be asked in post-trial motions to grant equitable relief such as enjoining the U from certain conduct in the future. This must have been requested as part of the original lawsuit but is not decided by the court until after the jury reaches its verdict. And the Judge's decision to grant or deny equitable relief can be appealed by either side.
EstronHawkKing
Well-Known Member
I wonder if Cowturd will run with this tomorrow on his show
tksirius
HN's Love Doctor
I'd presume so
Fryowa
Administrator
I'm sure he has a golden parachute that he can use if he agrees not to sue. Either way the U pays. This thing isn't done with Farta. I see this bitch going until Brands and McCaffery are resigned.
lightning1
Well-Known Member
No. The U will be paying her attorney fees in addition to the award.
Fryowa
Administrator
Barta's job is to be a buffer and most importantly scapegoat between the U and the monolithic outside force that is college sports. This force includes sadistic, rogue ex-employees hell bent on revenge. I guarantee you he is looking online for houses in a warm state and doing the math on his investments' cash value as we speak.
Fryowa
Administrator
If she wins that, correct? She has to sue and be awarded that, or no? My understanding was that it's typical in civil claims for attorneys to work on a contingency basis, or is that strictly for personal injury cases, etc? I'm wrong more often than not.
lightning1
Well-Known Member
Not according to a lawyer that handles these types of cases.
