Appeal
- Thread starter Duke
- Start date
Adam
Well-Known Member
It's one of those things that if you do it you better f***ing win! Kind of like going to trial should have been. I'm with you. we should work quickly to put this baby to bed. Pay the money. Settle with Tracy. Fire the AD. Hire a woman AD and let's move on. 4-5 million is not near as bad as if this story catches fire on a national scale. This is the damaging kind of publicity. No thanks to more court. Bruce, please make this go away sir.
STLhawkeye20
Well-Known Member
Boo ****ing hoo. Give me one solid example of quantifiable damage this "national publicity" will cause the University (other than more Court fees). The notion that firing a woman and having the balls to battle a discrimination case in Court tooth-and-nail will somehow irreparably damage the University is so melodramatic and overstated I can barely handle it. The horrific United incident from two weeks ago occurred in basically the Stone Ages in Internet-time. Iowa might get some bad pub for like an hour then the zillion other viral incidents will drown it out.
And you better fight this BS tooth-and-nail, yes, even to the Appellate level because this is what happens when you don't:
*Barta fires some clearly insubordinate "woman A" in 2019*
Lawyers to Woman A: Remember that discrimination claim against the University in 2017? They caved so easily and settled. Hey! You should bring the same claim! Maybe those suckers will throw you a settlement offer! After all, they clearly don't want the publicity, they didn't even take the claim in 2017 to appeal. Those losers will settle at the first sign of trouble! Might as well bring a claim for the hell of it!
Adam
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry that it bothers me if Iowa gets dragged through the mud for even 1 hour. Plus you are being dramatic. I never said it was irreparable damage. I do not accept your notion that just because the story won't last long on the national news docket that somehow people will forget it instantly afterwords. I remember almost every college scandal that has ever happened in my life time and I know about many from before my time. I bet you do too. I will say though that this is not a full blown scandal, but it is plenty bad enough for my tastes to have it in anyway associated with my University. Anyway you spin it we had nothing of evidentiary merit the first trial (read the transcripts). What makes you think we magically would fare better in an appeal or new trial is we miraculously won an appeal? The smart play is to throw money at the problem to make it go away no matter how you feel about it.
What percentage of cases that are appealed get reversed? Not too many unless there's a bombshell of new info uncovered. At this point the damage is done there is no 'winning' this. The athletic department will be cleaning house just a matter of when. And the sooner it does and that time goes by the faster it can be put behind everyone. Delaying that by appealing and going through with all of this to more than likely still lose only benefits lawyers...
Fryowa
Administrator
An "afterword" is the section at the end of a book where someone makes commentary, and "anyway" is two words the way you're using it.
I'm not normally one who'd stoop to grammar policing, but you did give us a speech a few weeks back telling us how you make bank and got your "undergrad at Tippie and MBA from Rice." If you're going to make the douche move of throwing around your (questionable) credentials, at least make it believable. LTG.
And the people here who really graduated from Iowa would probably appreciate you not tossing it around if you can't spell.
Also think appeal would be stupid. Obvious her poor behavior / performance was not adequately documented. Lesson learned. Pay her out and be done. Adjust your internal policies and fire someone if needed because they did not follow policy and procedures. I honestly think Barta was intimidated by her because she was there when he got there and she obviously is not a passive person. So instead of causing more friction he let it go on probably hoping she would just leave on her own.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Scandal? How is this a "scandal"? Not even close. It was a personnel matter that got out of hand, plain and simple. If there is legal grounds for an appeal, then let's appeal. If not, then pay her and move on. As I said before, it sickens me that a person as genuinely disliked as Jane will end up with a couple of million dollars for being a total and complete bitch to every single person she came in contact with...but when leadership is as bad as it was, you reap what you sow.
But spare me the scandal and the melodramatic hyperbole, please.
why barta didn't document a freaking thing she did bad, all he had on file were positive reviews it would be stupid to try to get this over turned it is not happening
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
That may very well be. However, our system isn't set up for majority rule...it is set up to also protect the individual.
The other aspect is that the average joe american doesn't realize how hard it is to sue for discrimination. The system is slanted toward industry rather than the individual as is suing for liability. Most people bring up the M D's coffee without knowing the particulars of the case. Deeper pockets have distinct advantages. Deeper pockets have also shaped our system. We have become a nation of frogs in the boiling pot.
The jury would have been given very explicit instructions. If those instructions were ignored, it would be all over the media.
Likely the University would lose an appeal. The best hope is for a reduction in the damages which is a likely outcome. This is strictly a business decision (appealing) and not a crusade to avenge a wrong (the verdict).
Adam
Well-Known Member
Are you sure this definition doesn't apply?
"An action or event regarded as morally or legally wrong and causing general public outrage".
Adam
Well-Known Member
Well put.
eledmonster
Well-Known Dog
Good idea or bad idea. This was in the cards in the first place. Long before this ever went to trial, the decision was most likely made to appeal if things did not turn out in favor of the university. This is just how things work.
I'm guessing a tainted jury foreman (person) who was clearly a sports fan and an obvious serious fan of the in-state rival.
Cases like this tend to draw national attention by those who share interest in the causes of the perceived victim. I would expect an appeal to result in national advocacy groups getting deeply involved. And I don't mean advocacy groups for lame, old, white AD's who don't document problems.
Adam
Well-Known Member
Unless the juror directly lied, then her bias is irrelevant. If she did it MIGHT be grounds for an appeal.
Side note, we are talking about 1 juror out of a unanimous verdict by 8 individuals. While it sucks she was on the panel in the first place, I have a hard time believing she was some force dictating the outcome.
Thawki
Well-Known Member
It just might also be that there is no winning this because the University is guilty of it. It's kind of funny how idea doesn't seem to dawn on a lot of people here.
