Maize v. Hawker Beechcraft Corporation

Filing 145

JUDGMENT in favor of Hawker Beechcraft Corporation against Martin O Maize, Sr re 141 Jury Verdict and denying Hawker Beechcraft's renewed motion for judgment as moot. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/27/12. (kpr)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION MARTIN O. MAIZE, SR. v. PLAINTIFF No.4:09-cv-399-DPM HAWKER BEECHCRAFT CORPORATION DEFENDANT JUDGMENT The Court, in an earlier order, dismissed without prejudice Mr. Maize's hostile-work-environment and section 1981 claims. Document No. 128. This left three claims for trial: Mr. Maize's Title VII race-discrimination claim, his ADEA age-discrimination claim, and his FMLA-retaliation claim. The parties tried these claims to a twelve-person jury from 23 January 2012 to 26 January 2012. After deliberations, on 26 January 2012, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Hawker Beechcraft on all three claims. The verdict forms are attached and incorporated. On the race-discrimination claim, the age-discrimination claim, and the FMLA-retaliation claim, the Court enters judgment on the jury's verdict for Hawker Beechcraftand against Mr. Maize. Mr. Maize's Amended Complaint, Document No. 76, is therefore dismissed with prejudice. During the trial, Hawker Beechcraft moved for judgment as a matter of law on all claims at the end of Mr. Maize's case. The Court denied the motion. Hawker Beechcraft renewed its motion at the end of all the proof. The Court took the motion under advisement. In light of the jury's verdict, the Court denies Hawker Beechcraft's renewed motion for judgment as moot. So Ordered. -2­ RACE-DISCRIMINATION CLAIM Question No.1: Has Mr. Maize proved that he was meeting H a $ EAs-Ps i.9.4fm E 0 RJVD'STI{J~• •1Aa JAN 26 20" Beechcraft's legitimate job expectations? - - Yes /No ~CLe ." .. ~ If you answered Question No.1 "Yes," then answer Question No.2. If you answered Question No.1 "No," then your deliberations on this claim are done and the Foreperson should sign this form. Question No.2: Has Mr. Maize proved that his race was a motivating factor in Hawker Beechcraft's decision? - - Yes _ _ No If you answered Question No.2 "Yes," then answer Question No.3. If you answered Question No.2 "No," then your deliberations on this claim are done and the Foreperson should sign this form. Maize v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. 26 January 2012-Final Version Question No.3: Has Hawker Beechcraft proved that it would have discharged Mr. Maize regardless of his race? -- Yes _ _ No If you answered Question No.3 "No," then answer Question No.4. If you answered Question No.3 "Yes," then your deliberations on this claim are done and the Foreperson should sign the form. Question No.4: What are the amount of Mr. Maize's damages (as that term is defined in Instruction Nos. 8 & 9) for Hawker Beechcraft's decision to discharge him on the basis of his race? Wages & fringe benefits: $ Mental anguish, inconvenience, and other non-monetary loss $ ~ i7,~P Foreperson Maize v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. I - 2.~- _ _ jZ 3;00 pm Date/Time 26 January 2012-Final Version AGE-DISCRIMINATION CLAIM Question No.1: Has Mr. Maize proved that he met the applicable job qualifications? - - Yes V No If you answered Question No. 1 "Yes," then answer Question No.2. If you answered Question No.1 "No," then your deliberations on this claim are done and the Foreperson should sign this form. Question No.2: Has Mr. Maize proved that but for his age, Hawker Beechcraft would not have discharged him? _ _ Yes No If you answered Question No.2 "Yes," then answer Question No.3. If you answered Question No.2 "No," then your deliberations on this claim are done and the Foreperson should sign this form. Maize v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. 26 January 2012-Final Version Question No.3: What are the amount of Mr. Maize's damages (as that term is defined in Instruction No. 11) for Hawker Beechcraft's decision to discharge him on the basis of his age? Wages & fringe benefits: $-------­ If you were instructed to answer, and actually answered, Question No.3, then answer Question No.4. Question No.4: Was Hawker Beechcraft's conduct "willful" as defined in Instruction No. 12? _ _ Yes ~ [7, dFC Foreperson Maize v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. _ _ No 1- Z~ -/2. Date/Time 26 January 2012-Final Version FMLA-RETALIATION CLAIM Question No.1: Has Mr. Maize proved that his decision to take authorized FMLA leave was a motivating factor in Hawker Beechcraft's decision to discharge him? _ _ Yes . / No H you answered Question No.1 uYes," then answer Question No.2. If you answered Question No. II/No," then your deliberations on this claim are done and the Foreperson should sign this form. Question No.2: Has Hawker Beechcraft proved that it would have discharged Mr. Maize regardless of his decision to take authorized FMLA leave? -- Yes _ _ No H you answered Question No.2 UNo," then answer Question No.3. If you answered Question No.2 uYes," then your deliberations on this claim are done and the Foreperson should sign the form. Maize v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. 26 January 2012-Final Version Question No.3: What are the amount of Mr. Maize's damages (as that term is defined in Instruction No. 15) for Hawker Beechcraft's decision to discharge him in retaliation for taking authorized FMLA leave? Wages & fringe benefits: $--------­ If you were instructed to answer, and actually answered, Question No.3, then answer Question No.4. Question No.4: Did Hawker Beechcraft act in good faith, meaning did the company reasonably believe that its actions complied with the Family and Medical Leave Act? - - Yes c::: Foreperson Maize v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. '::­ _ _ _ No 1- '2~ - J2 Date/Time 26 January 2012-Final Version

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?