The Jerry Baldwin Saga: 1998-2020

[Bunch24]

_ So, he doesn't get one single red penny? _

Not now, he doesn't. But they'll have another trial and he'll get his say in court again.

Reading those documents sheds a lot of light on the case. Simply put, the jurors in that case were idiots. And I'm being nice.

[NewsCopy]

A state appeal court has thrown out the $2 million verdict a jury awarded former University of Louisiana football coach Jerry Baldwin in a lawsuit claiming racial discrimination in his firing. In an opinion released Wednesday, the state 1st Circuit Court of Appeal in Baton Rouge cited problems with jury selection, confusion over the jury verdict form and an expert witness who should not have been allowed to testify. A three-judge appeals panel wrote that “a fair, impartial resolution requires a new trial.” “This ruling clears the way for a new trial, at which we will continue to vigorously contest Coach Baldwin’s allegations,” UL’s attorneys in the case, the Oats and Hudson firm, said in a written statement. “We are confident that at a fair trial the jury will recognize that he was fired because of his 6 wins and 27 losses and not because of his race.” The rest of the story By RICHARD BURGESS Advocate Acadiana bureau

 

[UL_Cajuns]

Good for that SOB. He just wants something for nothing, like alot of other people in this world.

[HOUCajun]

This is good news for UL. Although it looks like we are years away from seeing final resolution to the matter.

[GetTheFacts1st]

The reversal is a monumental setback to the National Association of TOOTH-PICKERS!!

Awwwwwww, Jawee and Karl .... your'e screwed now! The MOMENTUM has shifted ...as it RIGHTFULLY should have!

[GetTheFacts1st]

_ Good for that SOB. He just wants something for nothing, like alot of other people in this world. _

You DON'T mean an ENTITLEMENT, do you? LOL

[Cajunsmike]

_ Not now, he doesn't. But they'll have another trial and he'll get his say in court again.

Reading those documents sheds a lot of light on the case. Simply put, the jurors in that case were idiots. And I'm being nice. _

It does appear that the jurors had lots of inconsistencies in the way they answered questions. That makes me think the university's lawyers could have done a better job in screening jurors. I do understand that the judge allowed one juror to remain after the university questioned her ability to be fair. As far as the judge is concerned, his record is not stellar either as evidenced by the info in this post from the Scout board.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=345&f=3397&t=4470094

[GetTheFacts1st]

_ That makes me think the university's lawyers could have done a better job in screening jurors.

http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=345&f=3397&t=4470094 _

Wasn't one of the university's lead attorneys a REAL ESTATE lawyer who, by odd chance, lived next door an influential former university official?? Yoooo Hoooo!

[Turbine]

This was/is (should have been) a slam dunk case.

The loss sits on the shoulders of a disinterested law firm.

This case could have been used to give UL a truck load of positive publicity.


igeaux.mobi

[Just1More]

_ Wasn't one of the university's lawyers primarily a REAL ESTATE lawyer who , by chance, lived next door an influential former univiesity employee? _

I don't know anything about the background on UL's attornies, but this case should not require F. Lee Bailey. Once a judge fails to support proper jury selection, it is in the best interest of the defense attornies to open that door wide for an appeal. This judgement had "toss" written all over it.

With a reasonable judge and proper jury selection in the next trial, there is no way Baldwin comes out on top.