Edwards v. Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC et al

Filing 150

(SET ASIDE AND VACATED ONLY AS TO HYUNDAI MOTOR MANUFACTURING ALABAMA, LLC PURSUANT TO 214 OPINION AND ORDER) ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows: (1) Judgment is entered in favor of plf Tammy Edwards and against defs Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC, and Mike Swindle, individually; (2) Plf Edwards shall have and recover from def Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC, the sum of $700,000.00 in compensatory damages; (3) Plf Edwards shall have and recover from def Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC, the additional sum of $5,000,000.00 in punitive damages; (4) Plf Edwards shall have and recover from def Swindle, individually, the sum of $85,000.00 in compensatory damages; (5) Plf Edwards shall have and recover from def Swindle, individually, the additional sum of $10,000.00 in punitive damages; (6) The above awards are subject to any applicable statutory damages caps; further ORDERING that costs are taxed against defs Hyundai Motor Ma nufacturing Alabama, LLC, and Mike Swindle, individually, for which execution may issue; directing the clerk to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the FRCP. Signed by Honorable Myron H. Thompson on 5/5/09. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, ) Modified on 3/31/2010 (wcl, ). Modified on 3/31/2010 (wcl, ).

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

TAMMY EDWARDS, Plaintiff, v. HYUNDAI MOTOR MANUFACTURING ALABAMA, LLC, and MIKE SWINDLE, individually, Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) JUDGMENT

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:07cv908-MHT (WO)

On the 1st day of May 2009, after this cause had been submitted to a jury, a verdict form as to liability was returned as follows: CLAIM 1: Sexual Harassment (Hostile Work Environment) 1. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that Edwards has established the three elements of step one? Yes No X

If "No," you have found that Hyundai is not liable on this claim. Move to CLAIM 2. 2. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that Hyundai has established its affirmative defense at step two? Yes No X

If you answered "Yes" to this question, then you have found that Hyundai is not liable on this claim. If you answered "Yes" to question one and "No" to question two, then you have found that Hyundai is liable on this claim. CLAIM 2: Retaliation 1. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that Edwards has established the four elements of unlawful retaliation? Yes No If "No," you have found that Hyundai is not liable on this claim. Move to CLAIM 3. 2. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that Hyundai has proved that Edwards would have been subjected to the same adverse employment action for other reasons even in the absence of her complaint of sexual harassment? X

2

Yes No X

If "Yes," you have found that Hyundai is not liable on this claim. However, if you answered "Yes" to question one and "No" to question two, then you have found that Hyundai is liable on this claim. CLAIM 3: Negligent Supervision 1. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that Hyundai failed to exercise reasonable and ordinary care in supervising Swindle? Yes No If "No," you have found that Hyundai is not liable on this claim. Move to CLAIM 4. 2. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that Edwards's own negligence contributed in whole or in part to her damages? Yes No X X

If "Yes," you have found that Hyundai is not liable on this claim. However, if you answered "Yes" to question one, and you answered "No" to question two, you have found that Hyundai is liable on this claim.

3

CLAIM 4: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress May Edwards prevail on her claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress against defendant Swindle? Yes No CLAIM 5: Assault and Battery May Edwards prevail on her claim of assault and battery against Swindle? Yes No CLAIM 6: Invasion of Privacy May Edwards prevail on her claim of invasion of privacy against Swindle? Yes No SO SAY WE ALL. /S/ Steve Garst FOREPERSON Date: 5-1-09 X X X

4

Later, on the 1st day of May 2009, after this cause had been resubmitted to a jury, a verdict form as to damages was returned as follows: COMPENSATORY DAMAGES 1. How much, if any, may Edwards recover in total compensatory damages? $ 785,000

2. What portion of those damages may be attributed to:
Hyundai a. Sexual Harassment b. Retaliation c. Negligent Supervision Swindle d. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress e. Assault and Battery f. Invasion of Privacy $ $ $ 50,000 15,000 20,000 $ $ $ 200,000 200,000 300,000

PUNITIVE DAMAGES 1. How much, if any, may Edwards recover in total punitive damages? 5

$

5,010,000

2. What portion of those damages may be attributed to:
Hyundai a. Sexual Harassment b. Retaliation c. Negligent Supervision Swindle d. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress e. Assault and Battery f. Invasion of Privacy $ $ $ 6,000 1,000 3,000 $ $ $ 1,000,000 1,000,000 3,000,000

SO SAY WE ALL. /S/ Steve Garst FOREPERSON Date: 5-1-09 It is therefore the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court as follows: (1) Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff Tammy Edwards and against defendants Hyundai Motor

6

Manufacturing individually.

Alabama,

LLC,

and

Mike

Swindle,

(2) Plaintiff Edwards shall have and recover from defendant Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC, the sum of $ 700,000.00 in compensatory damages. (3) Plaintiff Edwards shall have and recover from defendant Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC, the additional sum of $ 5,000,000.00 in punitive damages. (4) Plaintiff Edwards shall have and recover from defendant Swindle, individually, the sum of $ 85,000.00 in compensatory damages. (5) Plaintiff Edwards shall have and recover from defendant Swindle, individually, the additional sum of $ 10,000.00 in punitive damages. (6) The above awards are subject to any applicable statutory damages caps. It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against defendants Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC, and

7

Mike

Swindle,

individually,

for

which

execution

may

issue. The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. DONE, this the 5th day of May, 2009.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE