Opinion
9:20-cv-80001-Rosenberg/Reinhart
02-25-2022
GARRETT MYRON JONES, Claimant, v. CUTLASS COLLIERIES, LLC, n/k/a VSTA ENERGY RESOURCES, LLC, Employer.
COURT'S INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY
Members of the jury:
It's my duty to instruct you on the rules of law that you must use in deciding this case.
When I have finished you will go to the jury room and begin your discussions, sometimes called deliberations.
Duty to Follow Instructions - Corporate Party Involved (Limited Liability Company)
Your decision must be based only on the evidence presented here. You must not be influenced in any way by either sympathy for or prejudice against anyone.
You must follow the law as I explain it - even if you do not agree with the law - and you must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You must not single out or disregard any of the instructions on the law.
The fact that a limited liability company is involved as a party must not affect your decision in any way. A limited liability company and all other persons stand equal before the law and must be dealt with as equals in a court of justice. When a limited liability company is involved, of course, it may act only through people as its employees; and, in general, a limited liability company is responsible under the law for the acts and statements of its employees that are made within the scope of their duties as employees of the company.
Limited Liability Company - Acts Only Through its Agents
A limited liability company cannot act other than through its agents. In this case, when one of Cutlass' officers, such as Michael Snelling or Michael Beyer acted, by words or deeds, while performing their Cutlass duties, Cutlass itself performed such acts.
Consideration of Direct and Circumstantial Evidence; Argument of Counsel; Comments by the Court
As I said before, you must consider only the evidence that I have admitted in the case. Evidence includes the testimony of witnesses and the exhibits admitted. But anything the lawyers say is not evidence and isn't binding on you.
You shouldn't assume from anything I've said that I have any opinion about any factual issue in this case. Except for my instructions to you on the law, you should disregard anything I may have said during the trial in arriving at your own decision about the facts.
Your own recollection and interpretation of the evidence is what matters.
In considering the evidence you may use reasoning and common sense to make deductions and reach conclusions. You shouldn't be concerned about whether the evidence is direct or circumstantial.
“Direct evidence” is the testimony of a person who asserts that he or she has actual knowledge of a fact, such as an eyewitness.
“Circumstantial evidence” is proof of a chain of facts and circumstances that tend to prove or disprove a fact. There's no legal difference in the weight you may give to either direct or circumstantial evidence.
Credibility of Witnesses
When I say you must consider all the evidence, I don't mean that you must accept all the evidence as true or accurate. You should decide whether you believe what each witness had to say, and how important that testimony was. In making that decision you may believe or disbelieve any witness, in whole or in part. The number of witnesses testifying concerning a particular point doesn't necessarily matter.
To decide whether you believe any witness I suggest that you ask yourself a few questions:
1. Did the witness impress you as one who was telling the truth?
2. Did the witness have any particular reason not to tell the truth?
3. Did the witness have a personal interest in the outcome of the case?
4. Did the witness seem to have a good memory?
5. Did the witness have the opportunity and ability to accurately observe the things he or she testified about?
6. Did the witness appear to understand the questions clearly and answer them directly?
7. Did the witness's testimony differ from other testimony or other evidence?
Impeachment of Witnesses because of Inconsistent Statements
You should also ask yourself whether there was evidence that a witness testified falsely about an important fact. And ask whether there was evidence that at some other time a witness said or did something, or didn't say or do something, that was different from the testimony the witness gave during this trial.
But keep in mind that a simple mistake doesn't mean a witness wasn't telling the truth as he or she remembers it. People naturally tend to forget some things or remember them inaccurately. So, if a witness misstated something, you must decide whether it was because of an innocent lapse in memory or an intentional deception. The significance of your decision may depend on whether the misstatement is about an important fact or about an unimportant detail.
Responsibility for Proof - Preponderance of the Evidence
In this case, it is the responsibility of Mr. Jones to prove every essential part of his claims by a “preponderance of the evidence.” Also, it is the responsibility of Cutlass to prove every essential part of its affirmative defense by a “preponderance of the evidence.” This is sometimes called the “burden of proof” or the “burden of persuasion.”
A “preponderance of the evidence” simply means an amount of evidence that is enough to persuade you that Mr. Jones's claim is more likely true than not true.
If the proof fails to establish any essential part of a claim or contention by a preponderance of the evidence, you should find against Mr. Jones.
In deciding whether any fact has been proved by a preponderance of the evidence, you may consider the testimony of all of the witnesses, regardless of who may have called them, and all of the exhibits received in evidence, regardless of who may have produced them.
If the proof fails to establish any essential part of Mr. Jones's claim by a preponderance of the evidence, you should find for Cutlass as to that claim.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act - 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634
In this case, Mr. Jones makes a claim under the federal law that prohibits employers from discriminating against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment because of the employee's age. The federal law applies to employees who are at least 40 years old.
Specifically, Mr. Jones claims that Cutlass eliminated his position and terminated his employment because of his age. Cutlass denies Mr. Jones's claim and asserts that Mr. Jones's position was eliminated as the Company transitioned from development to operations and as part of a company-wide reduction in force necessitated for financial reasons, and maintains that his age had nothing to do with the decision. Mr. Jones asserts that Cutlass's suggested reasons are pretext or cover-ups for age discrimination.
To succeed on his claim against Cutlass, Mr. Jones must prove each of the following facts by a preponderance of the evidence:
First: Mr. Jones was Cutlass's employee; in this case, the parties have stipulated that Mr. Jones was Cutlass's employee;
Second: Mr. Jones was at least 40 years old at the time of his termination; the parties have stipulated that Mr. Jones was at least 40 years old at the time of his termination;
Third: Cutlass terminated Mr. Jones; the parties have stipulated that Cutlass terminated Mr. Jones; and
Fourth: Cutlass took that action because of Mr. Jones's age.
Because the Parties stipulate and agree that Mr. Jones was Cutlass's employee, was at least 40 years old, and that Cutlass terminated him, you must decide whether Cutlass took those actions because of Mr. Jones's age.
To determine that Cutlass terminated Mr. Jones because of his age, you must decide that Cutlass would not have terminated him if Mr. Jones had been younger but everything else had been the same.
Cutlass denies that it made the decision to terminate Mr. Jones because of his age, and asserts that Mr. Jones's position was eliminated as part of a company-wide reduction-in-force necessitated for financial reasons. Specifically, Cutlass asserts that Mr. Jones's position was selected for elimination in its reduction-in-force because the Company was transitioning from development to operations, Cutlass had a financial need to cut its overhead costs for payroll, Mr. Jones was among the highest paid employees at Cutlass, and Mr. Jones was not currently providing value to Company sufficient to justify keeping him on the payroll at the time given his high salary rate.
An employer may not discriminate against an employee because of age, but an employer may terminate an employee for any other reason, good or bad, fair or unfair. If you believe Cutlass's reason for terminating Mr. Jones and you find that Cutlass's decision was not because of Mr. Jones's age, you must not second guess that decision, and you must not substitute your own judgment for Cutlass's judgment - even if you do not agree with it.
Pretext
As I have explained, Mr. Jones has the burden to prove that Cutlass's decision to terminate him was because of his age. I have explained to you that evidence can be direct or circumstantial. To decide whether Cutlass's decision to terminate Mr. Jones was because of Mr. Jones's age, you may consider the circumstances of Cutlass's decision. For example, you may consider whether you believe the reasons Cutlass gave for the decision. If you do not believe the reasons it gave for the decision, you may consider whether the reasons were so unbelievable that they were a cover-up to hide the true discriminatory reasons for the decision.
Compensatory Damages
If you find in Mr. Jones's favor for each fact he must prove, you must consider Mr. Jones's compensatory damages.
When considering the issue of Mr. Jones's compensatory damages, you should determine what amount, if any, has been proven by Mr. Jones by a preponderance of the evidence as full, just and reasonable compensation for all of Mr. Jones's damages as a result of Mr. Jones' termination, no more and no less. Compensatory damages are not allowed as a punishment and must not be imposed or increased to penalize Cutlass. Also, compensatory damages must not be based on speculation or guesswork.
You should consider the following elements of damage, to the extent you find that Mr. Jones has proved it by a preponderance of the evidence, and no others: net lost wages and benefits from the date of Cutlass's termination of Mr. Jones to date of your verdict.
Mitigation of Damages
You are instructed that any person who claims damages as a result of an alleged wrongful act on the part of another has a duty under the law to “mitigate” those damages. For purposes of this case, the duty to mitigate damages requires Mr. Jones to be reasonably diligent in seeking substantially equivalent employment to the position he held with Cutlass. To prove that Mr. Jones failed to mitigate damages, Cutlass must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) work comparable to the position Mr. Jones held with Cutlass was available, and (2) Mr. Jones did not make reasonably diligent efforts to obtain it. If, however, Cutlass shows that Mr. Jones did not make reasonable efforts to obtain any work, then Cutlass does not have to prove that comparable work was available.
If you find that Cutlass proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Jones failed to mitigate damages, then you should reduce the amount of Mr. Jones's damages by the amount that could have been reasonably realized if Mr. Jones had taken advantage of an opportunity for substantially equivalent employment.
Duty to Deliberate when Only One Party Seeks Damages
Of course, the fact that I have given you instructions concerning the issue of Plaintiff's damages should not be interpreted in any way as an indication that I believe that the Plaintiff should, or should not, prevail in this case.
Your verdict must be unanimous - in other words, you must all agree. Your deliberations are secret, and you'll never have to explain your verdict to anyone.
Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after fully considering the evidence with the other jurors. So you must discuss the case with one another and try to reach an agreement. While you're discussing the case, don't hesitate to reexamine your own opinion and change your mind if you become convinced that you were wrong. But don't give up your honest beliefs just because others think differently or because you simply want to get the case over with.
Remember that, in a very real way, you're judges - judges of the facts. Your only interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case.
Election of Foreperson Explanation of Verdict Form
When you get to the jury room, choose one of your members to act as foreperson. The foreperson will direct your deliberations and speak for you in court.
A verdict form has been prepared for your convenience.
[Explain verdict]
Take the verdict form with you to the jury room. When you've all agreed on the verdict, your foreperson must fill in the form, sign and date it. Then you'll return it to the courtroom.
If you wish to communicate with me at any time, please write down your message or question and give it to the court security officer. The court security officer will bring it to me and I'll respond as promptly as possible - either in writing or by talking to you in the courtroom. Please understand that I may have to talk with the lawyers and the parties before I respond to your question or message, so you should be patient as you await my response. But I caution you to not tell me how many jurors have voted one way or the other at that time. That type of information should remain in the jury room and not be shared with anyone, including me, in your note or question.