NEW BEDFORD, Mass. — A Bristol County judge has reversed a jury’s finding that a male police officer had retaliated against a former female officer who alleged gender discrimination. The ruling, issued on Monday, deemed that the jury’s decision could not be upheld due to insufficient evidence and the court’s failure to give appropriate jury instructions.
The judge’s decision is a significant relief for the city, which was facing a potential payout of $127,000 in damages. However, Macaila Saunders, the plaintiff and former officer, plans to appeal this ruling to the state Appeals Court, prolonging a case that began in 2021.
With ongoing litigation anticipated, city public information officer Jonathan Darling stated via email that the city would not comment further on the matter. Similarly, the police department has chosen to remain silent.
Saunders, who left the New Bedford Police Department four years ago, initially brought forth claims of gender discrimination and retaliation. While the latter claim ultimately went to trial, the gender discrimination charge was dismissed by mutual agreement. The jury found in March that now-Assistant Deputy Chief Scott Carola had retaliated against Saunders, awarding her $50,000 for emotional distress and an additional $77,000 for lost wages.
In April, the city filed motions seeking to dismiss the jury’s verdict and requesting a new trial. This week, Judge William White Jr. agreed, stating the jury had not been adequately instructed regarding the statute of limitations relevant to their verdict. In his 17-page decision, White noted that this oversight likely contributed to a conclusion that he believed did not align with credible evidence.
Additionally, he considered the jury’s award of $50,000 for emotional damages to be “grossly disproportionate” and indicative of a potential “miscarriage of justice” considering the evidence presented.
The judge also indicated that if his review was flawed and Saunders had, in fact, established adequate grounds for retaining the jury’s verdict, both Carola and the city would be entitled to a new trial to reassess damages.
Saunders’ attorney, Christopher Trundy, views the judge’s remarks as a basis for potentially revisiting the issue should a higher court find merit in the original jury’s conclusions. Trundy stands by the jury’s work, asserting that it should be respected and arguing that the judge’s analysis does not align with the evidence gathered.
Saunders has a 30-day window to file her appeal. Trundy noted that the appellate process could extend for several months once initiated.
This article was automatically written by Open AI. The people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate, and any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.