Diane Reifschneider v. University of California - Los Angeles and Malcolm Nicol
Published: May 23, 1998 | Result Date: Mar. 24, 1998 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: BC152958 Verdict – $0
Judge
Court
L.A. Superior Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Martin L. Stanley
(Law Office of Martin L. Stanley)
Defendant
Experts
Plaintiff
David Lewin
(technical)
Thomas Mintz
(medical)
Defendant
Carole Lieberman
(medical)
Lorin Lindner
(medical)
Facts
Beginning in 1993, plaintiff Diane Reifschneider, a 29-year-old graduate student, was a researcher in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at defendant University of California, Los Angeles. She performed research work in defendant Malcolm Nicol's laboratory in her capacities as both a student and an employee of the University. The plaintiff alleged that defendant Nicol, her graduate research advisor and supervisor, sexually harassed, intimidated and assaulted her over a nine-month period. The plaintiff brought this action against Nicol and his employer, The Regents of the University of California, based on statutory and common law theories of recovery for sexual harassment, assault, battery and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress theories of recovery.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand of $3,499,999.99 to the defendant University on Oct. 23, 1997, and amended it to $4,499,999.99 on Dec. 9, 1997. The plaintiff also made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand of $999,999.99 to defendant Nicol on Jan. 23, 1998. Defendant Nicol made a C.C.P. º998 offer of $100,002 to the plaintiff on Jan. 29, 1998.
Damages
The plaintiff claimed future lost earnings, medical expenses and emotional distress damages in excess of $8 million.
Injuries
The plaintiff alleged emotional distress.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately one year and nine months after the case was filed. The court granted the defendants' motions in limine, including a motion to preclude the introduction of evidence of prior sexual harassment by defendant Nicol. The plaintiff's attorney reported that in speaking with the jurors after the case, the court's refusal to allow that evidence to be heard was a turning point in this case.
Deliberation
eight hours
Poll
(10-2) hostile environment; (10-2) quid pro quo harassment; (9-3) battery; (10-2) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (12-0) negligent infliction of emotional distress
Length
19 days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390