Adams et al v. Austal, U.S.A., L.L.C.

Filing 515

Order on Jury Trial. This action came before the Court for jury selection on August 30, 2011, and trial by jury beginning September 26, 2011 and ending October 5, 2011, with United States District Judge Kristi K. DuBose presiding. On October 5, 2011 , the jury having heard the evidence, the arguments of counsel, the charge of the Court and having considered the same upon their oaths, deliberated and returned with the verdicts as stated (attached).. Signed by Judge Kristi K. DuBose on 10/17/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Adams Verdict, # 2 Barnes Verdict, # 3 Carter Verdict, # 4 Hedgeman Verdict, # 5 Johnson Verdict) (mca)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
EARATON ADAMS,
MYRON BARNES,
FREDERICK CARTER,
SIDNEY HEDGEMAN and
CARLOS JOHNSON,
Plaintiffs,
v.
AUSTAL U.S.A., L.L.C.,
Defendant.

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

CIVIL ACTION 08-00155-KD-N

ORDER
This action came before the Court for jury selection on August 30, 2011, and trial by jury
beginning September 26, 2011 and ending October 5, 2011, with United States District Judge
Kristi K. DuBose presiding.
On September 26, 2011, the jury was duly sworn and trial commenced. From September
26, 2011 through September 29, 2011, Plaintiffs Earaton Adams, Myron Barnes, Frederick
Carter, Sidney Hedgeman and Carlos Johnson presented their case-in-chief.
Defendant Austal, U.S.A., L.L.C. (“Austal”) moved for judgment as a matter of law at
the close of the Plaintiffs’ evidence on all claims. On the afternoon of September 29, 2011, the
Court addressed Austal’s motion: that portion of the motion relating to the hostile work
environment claims was denied, and the motion, as to the remaining claims, was taken under
submission.
Plaintiffs rested in the morning on September 30, 2011. Subsequently, Austal began
1

presentation of its case-in-chief.
Austal concluded its case-in-chief and rested on October 3, 2011. Austal moved for
judgment as a matter of law at the close of all of the evidence and the Court heard oral argument
on same on the afternoon of October 3, 2011, and ruled on the record.
On the morning of October 4, 2011, the Court held a charge conference with counsel.
Thereafter, the parties gave their closing arguments. The Court then charged the jury on the
applicable law and the jury commenced their deliberations. At the end of the day on October 4,
2011, the jury recessed for the day.
On October 5, 2011, the jury having heard the evidence, the arguments of counsel, the
charge of the Court and having considered the same upon their oaths, deliberated and returned
the following verdicts (a copy of which is attached hereto):
Plaintiff Earaton Adams
I. Hostile Work Environment
Do you find for Earaton Adams or Austal USA on Adams’ claim of hostile work
environment?
No verdict
II. Failure to Promote
Do you find for Earaton Adams or Austal USA on Adams’ claim of failure to
promote?
Austal, USA
III. Damages
None

2

Plaintiff Myron Barnes
I. Hostile Work Environment
Do you find for Myron Barnes or Austal USA on Barnes’ claim of hostile work
environment?
No verdict
II. Failure to Promote
Do you find for Myron Barnes or Austal USA on Barnes’ claim of failure to
promote?
Austal, USA
III. Retaliation
Do you find for Myron Barnes or Austal USA on Barnes’ claim of retaliation?
Austal, USA
IV. Damages
None

Plaintiff Frederick Carter
I. Hostile Work Environment
Do you find for Frederick Carter or Austal USA on Carter’s claim of hostile work
environment?
Austal, USA
II. Failure to Promote
Do you find for Frederick Carter or Austal USA on Carter’s claim of failure to
promote (Tom Bishop Warehouse Coordinator position in 2006)?
Austal, USA
Do you find for Frederick Carter or Austal USA on Carter’s claim of failure to
promote (Jerrod Bradford Warehouse Coordinator position in 2007)?
3

Austal, USA
III. Damages
None

Plaintiff Sidney Hedgeman
I. Hostile Work Environment
Do you find for Sidney Hedgeman or Austal USA on Hedgeman’s claim of
hostile work environment?
Austal, USA
II. Damages
None

Plaintiff Carlos Johnson
I. Hostile Work Environment
Do you find for Carlos Johnson or Austal USA on Johnson’s claim of hostile
work environment?
No verdict
II. Failure to Promote
Do you find for Carlos Johnson or Austal USA on Johnson’s claim of failure to
promote?
Austal, USA
III. Damages
None
DONE and ORDERED this the 14th day of October 2011.
/s/ Kristi K. DuBose
KRISTI K. DuBOSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
4