Ward Churchill's $1 Damage Award Said to Have Been Product of Jury Compromise
Thursday’s jury verdict in Ward Churchill’s lawsuit against the University of Colorado has given rise to a mystery: How is it that a jury could rule that the university had acted illegally in firing Mr. Churchill, and yet still award him only $1 in damages?
Five of the six members of the jury have told court officials they do not wish to speak with reporters about their thinking. But a sixth, Bethany Newill, called a local radio station, KHOW, last night and said the $1 judgment was the product of a compromise between a single holdout juror who believed Mr. Churchill should not receive any damages and five others who believed he should be awarded some significant amount, according to today’s edition of the Colorado Daily. Helping shape the jury’s verdict was Mr. Churchill’s decision to have his lawyers not specify how much money he wanted, as well as his insistence throughout the proceedings that all he wanted was to get his job back.
Read entire article at Chronicle of Higher Ed
Five of the six members of the jury have told court officials they do not wish to speak with reporters about their thinking. But a sixth, Bethany Newill, called a local radio station, KHOW, last night and said the $1 judgment was the product of a compromise between a single holdout juror who believed Mr. Churchill should not receive any damages and five others who believed he should be awarded some significant amount, according to today’s edition of the Colorado Daily. Helping shape the jury’s verdict was Mr. Churchill’s decision to have his lawyers not specify how much money he wanted, as well as his insistence throughout the proceedings that all he wanted was to get his job back.