Walker v. The Housing Authority for the City of Montgomery, Alabama

Filing 100

JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF JANET DeCRENYS CLAIMS AGAINST DEFENDANT HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY directing it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court, based on the 93 jury verdict, that: (1) Judgment is entered in favor of plainti ff Janet DeCreny and against defendant Housing Authority for the City of Montgomery; (2) Plaintiff DeCreny shall have and recover from defendant Montgomery Housing Authority the sum of $ 100,000 in compensatory damages for emotional suffering a nd mental anguish; further ORDERED that, should any statutory caps or other limitations apply to damages, defendant Montgomery Housing Authority is allowed until March 26, 2015, to file a motion, with accompanying brief, seeking a modification to ref lect such; further ORDERED that plaintiff DeCreny is allowed until March 26, 2015, to file a motion, with accompanying brief, for attorneys fees, as further set out in order; further ORDERED that costs are taxed against defendant Montgomery Housing A uthority, for which execution may issue; directing the clerk to enter this document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant to Rule 58 FRCP; these cases are not closed. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 3/6/15. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, ) .

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
SYNETHIA L. WALKER,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR
THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY,
ALABAMA,
Defendant.

JANET DeCRENY,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR
THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY,
ALABAMA, and SHANNELL
HARDWICK
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:13cv675-MHT
(WO)

CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:13cv846-MHT
(WO)

JUDGMENT ON PLAINTIFF JANET DeCRENY’S CLAIMS AGAINST
DEFENDANT HOUSING AUTHORITY
FOR THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY

On the 5th day of March 2015, after this cause had
been submitted to a jury, a verdict was returned as
follows:
I.
Do you find
evidence:

Liability

from

a

preponderance

of

the

Title VII Color Discrimination
1. That Ms. DeCreny’s color was a motivating
factor that prompted the Montgomery Housing
Authority to take an adverse employment action
against Ms. DeCreny?
Answer Yes or No

____NO_______

If your answer is “No,” this ends your
deliberations
on
the
issue
of
color
discrimination, and you should continue to
Question No. 3. If your answer is “Yes,” go to
the next question.
2. That the Montgomery Housing Authority
would have taken an adverse employment action
against Ms. DeCreny even if the Montgomery
Housing Authority had not taken Ms. DeCreny’s
color into account?
Answer Yes or No

____--______

If your answer is “Yes,” this ends your
deliberations
on
the
issue
of
color
discrimination, and you should continue to the
next issue. If your answer is “No,” then
consider this in the damages section.
2

Title VII Color Harassment
3. That Ms. DeCreny proved her color
harassment claim against the Montgomery Housing
Authority?
Answer Yes or No

______NO_______

If your answer is “No,” this ends your
deliberations on color harassment.
If your
answer is “Yes,” consider this in the damages
section.
Title VII retaliation
4. That Ms. DeCreny proved her Title VII
retaliation
claim
against
the
Montgomery
Housing Authority?
Answer Yes or No

______YES_______

If your answer is “No,” this ends your
deliberations on Title VII retaliation.
If
your answer is “Yes,” consider this in the
damages section.
...
II.
Do you find
evidence:

from

Damages
a

preponderance

of

the

1. That Ms. DeCreny should be able to
recover compensatory damages for emotional
suffering
and
mental
anguish
from
the
Montgomery Housing Authority for one or more of
her Title VII claims?
3

Answer Yes or No

______YES_______

If your answer is “Yes,”
in what amount?
$_100,000.00__
2. That Ms. DeCreny should be able to
recover compensatory damages for backpay from
the Montgomery Housing Authority under her
color discrimination and/or color retaliation
claims?
Answer Yes or No

_____NO_______

If your answer is “Yes,”
in what amount?
$_____________
...
SO SAY WE ALL.
_/s/ E Flynn_________
Foreperson’s Signature

DATE: __3/5/15________

It is therefore the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of
the court, based on the verdict (doc. no. 93), that:
(1) Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff Janet
DeCreny and against defendant Housing Authority for the
City of Montgomery.
(2) Plaintiff DeCreny shall have and recover from
defendant

Montgomery

Housing

4

Authority

the

sum

of

$ 100,000

in

compensatory

damages

for

emotional

suffering and mental anguish.
It is further ORDERED that, should any statutory
caps or other limitations apply to damages, defendant
Montgomery Housing Authority is allowed until March 26,
2015,

to

file

a

motion,

with

accompanying

brief,

seeking a modification to reflect such.
It is further ORDERED that plaintiff DeCreny is
allowed until March 26, 2015, to file a motion, with
accompanying brief, for attorney’s fees.

In her brief,

plaintiff

the

articulated
Georgia

v.

DeCreny
in

should

American

Barnes,

168

address

Civil
F.3d

Liberties

423

(11th

factors
Union

Cir.

of

1999);

Dillard v. City of Greensboro, 213 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir.
2000); Norman v. Hous. Auth. of City of Montgomery, 836
F.2d 1292 (11th Cir. 1988); Johnson v. Georgia Highway
Express, Inc., 488 F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974); Hearn v.
General Elec. Co., 1996 WL 937034 (M.D. Ala. Sept. 12,
1996) (Thompson, J.); Gay Lesbian Bisexual Alliance v.
5

Sessions, 930 F. Supp. 1492 (M.D. Ala. 1996) (Thompson,
J.).
It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against
defendant

Montgomery

Housing

Authority,

for

which

execution may issue.
The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this
document

on

the

civil

pursuant

to

Rule

58

of

docket
the

as

a

Federal

final
Rules

judgment
of

Civil

Procedure.
These cases are not closed.
DONE, this the 6th day of March, 2015.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson___
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE