Nassar et al v. Jackson et al

Filing 109

JUDGMENT ON JURY VERDICT that (1) Gena Smith have and recover $86,541 in compensatory damages from defendant Hughes School District and $2,500 in compensatory damages and $5,000 in punitive damages from defendant Earnestine Jackson--pl us post-judgment interest to accrue at the rate of.14% per annum; and (2) Plaintiff Ray Nassar have and recover $360,001 in compensatory damages from defendants Hughes School District and Earnestine Jackson, jointly and severally; $2, 500 in compensatory damages and $10,000 in punitive damages against defendant Earnestine Jackson, individually; and $16,000 in compensatory damages and $4,000 in punitive damages against Defendant Jimmy Wilkins - plus post-judgment interest to accrue at the rate of.14% annum. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 1/24/2013. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION

RAY NASSAR and GENA SMITH,
Plaintiffs
V.

EARNESTINE JACKSON, individually
and in her official capacity as a Hughes
School Board Member, ET AL.
Defendants

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

NO: 3:11CV00133 SWW

JUDGMENT ON JURY VERDICT
This action came on for trial on January 14, 2013, before a jury, the Honorable Susan
Webber Wright, United States District Court Judge, presiding. The issues having been duly tried
and the jury having rendered its verdicts on claims of plaintiffs Gena Smith and Ray Nassar--by
answering Interrogatories #1 and #2 on the procedural due process claim by Gena Smith against
the Hughes School District; Interrogatories #4, #5, #6, and #7, #8 on the race discrimination
claims by Gena Smith against the Hughes School District; Interrogatories #8 and #9 on the
breach of contract claim by Gena Smith against the Hughes School District; Interrogatories #10,
#11, #12 on the defamation claim by Gena Smith against Earnestine Jackson; Interrogatories #1
and #3 on the procedural due process claims by Ray Nassar against the Hughes School District;
Interrogatories #4, #5, #6, #7, and #8 on the race discrimination claims by Ray Nassar against
the Hughes School District and Earnestine Jackson; Interrogatories #9, #10 on the breach of
contract claim of Ray Nassar against the Hughes School District; and Interrogatories #11, #12,

#13, #14, #15, and #16 on the defamation claims of Ray Nassar against Earnestine Jackson and
Jimmy Wilkins–now therefore, pursuant to those answers,
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that plaintiff Gena Smith has proved the elements
of her claims for deprivation of property without procedural due process, against defendant
Hughes School District; race discrimination based on wrongful discharge against defendant
Hughes School District; breach of contract against defendant Hughes School District; and
defamation against defendant Earnestine Jackson.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that plaintiff Ray Nassar has proved the
elements of his claims for deprivation of property without procedural due process against
defendant Hughes School District; race discrimination based on wrongful discharge against
defendants Hughes School District and Earnestine Jackson; breach of contract against defendant
Hughes School District; defamation against defendant Earnestine Jackson; and defamation
against defendant Jimmy Wilkins.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that (1) plaintiff Gena Smith have
and recover $86,541 in compensatory damages from defendant Hughes School District and
$2,500 in compensatory damages and $5,000 in punitive damages from defendant Earnestine
Jackson--plus post-judgment interest to accrue at the rate of .14% per annum and (2) plaintiff
Ray Nassar have and recover $360,001 in compensatory damages from defendants Hughes
School District and Earnestine Jackson, jointly and severally; $2,500 in compensatory damages
and $10,000 in punitive damages against defendant Earnestine Jackson, individually; and
$16,000 in compensatory damages and $4,000 in punitive damages against Defendant Jimmy

2

Wilkins, individually–plus post-judgment interest to accrue at the rate of .14% per annum.1
IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 24TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2013.

/s/Susan Webber Wright
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

Court’s Instruction No. 29 and several reminders contained on the verdict forms
instructed the jury that plaintiffs could collect only one award for the loss of wages and benefits.
The verdict forms show that the jury awarded both plaintiffs damages for lost wages and benefits
under their claims for deprivation of due process, wrongful discharge, and breach of contract.
However, in accordance with the Court’s instructions, the jury recorded the amount awarded for
lost wages and benefits only once.
3