Weatherly et al v. Alabama State University

Plaintiff: Jacqueline Weatherly, Cynthia Williams and Lydia Burkhalter
Defendant: Alabama State University
Case Number: 2:2010cv00192
Filed: March 4, 2010
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Montgomery Office
County: Montgomery
Presiding Judge: W. Harold Albritton
Referring Judge: Terry F. Moorer
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
April 7, 2014 291 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER GRANTING 286 MOTION Return of Appeal Bond and 287 MOTION Entry of Satisfaction of Judgment ; further ORDERING that the judgment against ASU has been satisfied and ASU's Appeal Bond No. 99-45-86 shall be returned to ASU following the entry of this ORDER, as further set out. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 4/7/14. Furnished to Clerk & Finance.(djy, )
January 23, 2014 285 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER DENYING without prejudice 279 MOTION for return of appeal bond and 280 MOTION Entry of Satisfaction of Judgment, as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 1/23/14. (djy, )
January 10, 2014 281 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE as to why 279 Motion for Bond, 280 Motion for Entry of Satisfaction of Judgment should not be granted; Show Cause Response due by 1/17/2014. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 1/10/14. (djy, )
November 21, 2013 278 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT: In accordance with the 277 Memorandum Opinion and Order the court entered this day assessing attorneys fees and expenses against the Defendant,Judgment is entered against Alabama State University and in favor of the claimants in the amount of $1,123,034.40, for which execution may issue. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 11/21/2013. (dmn, )
October 23, 2013 264 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Candis McGowan, Monica Arrington, and Joseph L. Fitzpatrick as to why 262 and 263 Motions to Modify attorneys' charging liens should not be granted; Show Cause Response due by 11/1/2013, as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 10/23/13. (djy, )
October 4, 2013 256 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER the Unopposed Motion to Continue Deadline to Respond to Show Cause Order 255 is GRANTED until October 16, 2013. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 10/4/2013. (jg, )
September 20, 2012 245 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER as follows: 1. The 243 MOTION to Withdraw as Counsel is GRANTED and Candis A. McGowen, Monica L. Arrington, and Joseph L. Fitzpatrick are allowed to withdraw from representation of Jacqueline Weatherly and Cynthia Williams. Plaintiffs Weather ly and Williams will continue to be represented by Kristin Taylor Ashworth, Mark Gonzalo Montiel, and Harold William Wasden. 2. The Motion for Leave to file a lien is GRANTED and a lien is placed on behalf of Candis A. McGowen, Monica L. Arrington, a nd Joseph L. Fitzpatrick against any recovery inthis case by Plaintiffs Weatherly and Williams, whether by final judgment rendered or settlement, for reasonable attorneys fees for work performed for them until 9/17/2012 in an amount to be determined by the court at a late date. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 9/20/2012. (dmn, )
September 4, 2012 239 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER re Alabama State University's 186 Motion for Stay of Execution of Judgment and 213 Motion for Approval of Appeal Bond and Stay of Execution of Judgment. Alabama State University now having filed a good and sufficient supersedeas bond, it is hereby ORDERED that the Motions are GRANTED and execution on the judgment is STAYED pending the outcome of the appeal. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 9/4/2012. (dmn, )
July 23, 2012 206 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER that 193 Motion to Strike is GRANTED only to the extent that the court denies the Rule 50 and 59 motion as untimely, but construes the motion as a Rule 60(b)(6) motion; that defendant's 182 Motion, construed as a Rule 60(b)(6) motion, is DENIED. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 7/23/2012. (cc, )
May 25, 2012 172 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER that the Plaintiff's 162 Motion for Equitable Relief is GRANTED as further set out in this opinion and order, and the front pay and prejudgment interest on back pay awards specified in this Memorandum Opinion and Order will be awarded in the court's separate Final Judgment. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 5/25/2012. (dmn, )
April 23, 2012 158 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER as follows: 1. The oral Motions and Renewed Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law are DENIED. 2. The statutory cap of $300,000 set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 1981a (b)(3)(D) is applied to the mental anguish damages of Jacqueline Weatherly. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 4/23/2012. (dmn, )
February 7, 2012 146 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: This cause is before the court on the Defendant's 111 Motion in Limine, the Defendant's 100 Objections to the Plaintiffs' Witness List, and the Plaintiff's 144 Motion to Strike the Defendant's 143 Second Amende d Trial Exhibit List. The court held a hearing on the pending matters on 2/6/2011. It is ORDERED as follows: 1. The Defendant's 111 Motion in Limine is DENIED as to evidence which pre-dates March 2008, and as to Burkhalters own testimony as to her knowledge of personal relationships of John Knight with women employed at ASU. 2. The Defendants Motion in Limine is GRANTED as to evidence that John Knight fathered a child with one of Plaintiffs witnesses.3. The Defendants Motion in Limine is GRANTED to the extent that, as discussed above, the Plaintiffs must take up all other evidence which is the subject of the Motion in Limine outside of the presence of the jury during breaks in the trial. 4. The Objection (Doc. 100 ) by Defendant to testimony by Joy Banks that the office at ASU does not run as smoothly after Weatherly left employment with ASU is SUSTAINED. 5. Objections to witnesses not governed by the courts ruling on the Motion in Limine will be taken up at trial. 6. For reasons discussed at the hearing, the Plaintiffs Motion to Strike the Defendants Second Amended Trial Exhibit List (Doc. 144 ) is GRANTED as to Defendants Exhibits 50, 54-60. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 2/7/2012. (dmn, )
February 1, 2012 136 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER re Defendant's 110 Objections to Plaintiffs' Amended Witness List for Trial, and the Defendant's 111 MOTION in Limine. It is ORDERED as follows: 1. The Plaintiffs are DIRECTED to file by noon on 2/3/2012, a statement of the a nticipated testimony of all witnesses objected to by the Defendant (Doc. 101 ). 2. The court will take up the 111 Motion in Limine and Objections to those witnesses at a hearing following jury selection on 2/6/2012. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 2/1/2012. (dmn, )
January 31, 2012 134 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER re Plaintiffs' 103 Objections to the Defendant's Exhibits and the Plaintiffs' 107 Motion in Limine. It is ORDERED as follows: 1. The 107 Motion in Limine is GRANTED as further set out in the order. 2. Defense counsel is DIR ECTED to confer with Plaintiffs' counsel and determine whether its newest list, with attachments (Doc. 121 ), is sufficient to alleviate Plaintiffs' counsel's concerns about what documents are being used by the Defendant at trial. If Plaintiffs' counsel's concerns persist, Defense counsel is DIRECTED to properly mark all of the exhibits, including separately identified documents now collectively marked as Exhibit 50, it intends to use at trial, and provide them to the P laintiffs by noon on 2/2/2012. 3. Plaintiff's Objections are SUSTAINED as to Defendant's Exhibits 27(a), 30, 33, 34, 35, 36, 44, 50 as presently identified, 52, 52(a), 52(b), and 53. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 1/31/2012. (dmn, )
January 30, 2012 131 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: Upon consideration of the Plaintiffs' 105 Proposed Jury Charges, filed on 1/23/2012, it appears to the court that the Plaintiffs are not asserting any disparate treatment claims at trial, but only hostile environment and retaliation cla ims. If that conclusion is in error, the Plaintiffs are given until noon on 2/1/2012 to so notify the court, and to supplement their requested jury charges with proposed charges on any disparate treatment claims they are asserting. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 1/30/2012. (dmn, )
January 20, 2012 102 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER that Plaintiffs' 85 Motion to Strike Defendant's Deposition Designations is GRANTED as further set out in the order. ORDER directing Plaintiffs TO SHOW CAUSE, if any there be, as to why the Defendant's remaining 101 Objections to Plaintiffs' Amended Witness List for Trial ought not be sustained. Show Cause Response due by 1/27/2012. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 1/20/2012. (dmn, )
December 8, 2011 89 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The 48 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as further set out in the order. The court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claim in Count Ten of the Amended Co mplaint, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 (c) (1), (2), and Count Ten is DISMISSED without prejudice. The case will proceed to trial on the following claims by each Plaintiff as further set out in the order. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 12/8/2011. (dmn, )
August 10, 2011 47 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING 46 Recommendation, and it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE that the Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by Jacqueline Weatherly is DENIED. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 8/10/2011. (dmn)
April 30, 2010 21 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER as follows: 1. The 11 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as moot. 2. The 9 Motion to Sever is DENIED without prejudice to being raised again at a later time. 3. The Plaintiff's request for costs and fees imposed pursuant to Rule 11 (Doc. 17 p. 16) is DENIED. Signed by Honorable W. Harold Albritton, III on 4/30/2010. (dmn)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Weatherly et al v. Alabama State University
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jacqueline Weatherly
Represented By: Candis Annette McGowan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cynthia Williams
Represented By: Candis Annette McGowan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Lydia Burkhalter
Represented By: Candis Annette McGowan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Alabama State University
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?