Filed: Sep. 24, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2019
Summary: [ PROPOSED ] JUDGMENT ANDREW J. GUILFORD , District Judge . On September 19, 2017 Plaintiff Karen Schatzle filed her Complaint against defendants the COUNTY OF ORANGE, SUSAN KANG SCHROEDER, and ANTHONY RACKAUCKAS. Docket (" Dkt ") No. 1. On May 22, 2019 the Court GRANTED Summary Judgment in favor of the County of Orange and Schroeder. Dkt No. 82. On August 6, 2019 trial commenced before a jury of eight (8). Dkt No. 123. On August 14, 2019, the jury returned a unanimous special verdic
Summary: [ PROPOSED ] JUDGMENT ANDREW J. GUILFORD , District Judge . On September 19, 2017 Plaintiff Karen Schatzle filed her Complaint against defendants the COUNTY OF ORANGE, SUSAN KANG SCHROEDER, and ANTHONY RACKAUCKAS. Docket (" Dkt ") No. 1. On May 22, 2019 the Court GRANTED Summary Judgment in favor of the County of Orange and Schroeder. Dkt No. 82. On August 6, 2019 trial commenced before a jury of eight (8). Dkt No. 123. On August 14, 2019, the jury returned a unanimous special verdict..
More
[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT
ANDREW J. GUILFORD, District Judge.
On September 19, 2017 Plaintiff Karen Schatzle filed her Complaint against defendants the COUNTY OF ORANGE, SUSAN KANG SCHROEDER, and ANTHONY RACKAUCKAS. Docket ("Dkt") No. 1.
On May 22, 2019 the Court GRANTED Summary Judgment in favor of the County of Orange and Schroeder. Dkt No. 82.
On August 6, 2019 trial commenced before a jury of eight (8). Dkt No. 123.
On August 14, 2019, the jury returned a unanimous special verdict in favor of Defendant Rackauckas and against Plaintiff Schatzle, as follows:
We the jury, in the above entitled action, unanimously find as follows:
Question No. 1:
Was plaintiff's candidacy for judge part of her official duties as a public employee?
___ YES XXX NO
The Court has filled in "No," because the parties have already agreed that plaintiff's run for judicial office was not part of her official duties as a public employee. Please answer Question 2, below.
Question No. 2
Did Anthony Rackauckas cause plaintiff Karen Schatzle to suffer an adverse employment action?
X YES ___ NO
If your answer to Question 2 is "Yes," answer Question 3, below. If your answer to Question 2 is "No," then please have your presiding juror sign and date this form and return same to the clerk.
Question No. 3:
Was plaintiff Karen Schatzle's campaign for judicial office a substantial or motivating factor for an adverse employment action undertaken by defendant Anthony Rackauckas?
___ YES X NO
If your answer to Question 3 is "Yes", answer Question 4 below. If your answer to Question 3 is "No", then please have the presiding juror sign and date this form and return same to the clerk.
Question No. 4:
Did Plaintiff Karen Schatzle suffer any non-economic damages?
___ YES ___ NO
If your answer to Question 4 is "Yes," then proceed to answer Question 5, below. If your answer to Question 4 is "No," then please proceed to Question 6, below.
Question No. 5:
Plaintiff Karen Schatzle's non-economic damages are $:_____________.
If Plaintiff suffered no damages, then answer Question 6 below.
Question No. 6:
If you answered "No" to Question 1, and "Yes" to both Questions 2, and 3 above, please answer "YES" to this Question since Plaintiff is entitled to nominal damages not to exceed $1.00.
___ YES
If you have awarded an amount of damages in response to Question 5, please proceed to Question 7, below.
Question No. 7:
Do you find by clear and convincing evidence that that defendant Anthony Rackauckas acted maliciously, oppressively, or in reckless disregard of violating plaintiff's First Amendment Rights?
___ YES ___ NO
Please have your Presiding Juror date and sign this verdict form and return it to the clerk.
Dated: 8/14/19 [REDACTED/]
Presiding Juror
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows:
1. That Defendants Anthony Rackauckas, Susan Kang Schroeder, and the County of Orange have judgment entered in their favor, and that Plaintiff Karen Schatzle take nothing by way of her Second Amended Complaint against Defendants; and,
2. Defendants Anthony Rackauckas, Susan Kang Schroeder, and the County of Orange may recover their costs of suit in accord with applicable law.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
