Jury Awards Former Plainfield Public Defender $500,000 in Gender Bias Suit
The mayor argued it was his prerogative to select his preferred advisers for positions subjected to annual reappointment, and that the plaintiff "didn't fit his vision."
March 17, 2020 at 04:29 PM
4 minute read
Attorneys at O'Connor, Parsons, Lane & Noble scored a $500,000 verdict by showing a mayor's refusal to reappoint the city's public defender was motivated by gender bias.
A jury in Union County Superior Court awarded $450,000 in economic damages and $50,000 for emotional distress on March 12 to Joy Spriggs, who held the job of public defender in Plainfield for 15 years until her appointment was not renewed in 2017. Spriggs, a Plainfield resident, claimed that Mayor Adrian Mapp had a discriminatory motive when he replaced her with Douglas Mitchell, a nonresident of the town, in violation of a local residency ordinance.
Spriggs asserted that the cabinet appointed by Mapp was overwhelmingly male, and that he preferred to have men in such positions as public defender. Her lawyers said Mapp appointed few women to paying positions in his administration, but hiring of women increased after the suit was filed.
The verdict was awarded after a seven-day trial before Superior Court Judge Robert Mega. A previous trial before Mega ended in a hung jury on March 2.
The job of public defender is a one-year appointment, filled every January by the mayor with the advice and consent of the city council.
Under cross-examination, Mapp criticized Spriggs' professionalism, but when pressed to elaborate, it was clear he knew very little about her job performance, said Greg Noble of Springfield-based O'Connor Parsons, who represented Spriggs along with the firm's Robert Ballard III.
Mapp also argued that it was his prerogative to select his preferred advisers for positions that were subject to annual reappointment, and that Spriggs "didn't fit his vision." He also claimed during trial that Spriggs supported another candidate for mayor.
Noble says he and Ballard showed that the mayor could not deny a reappointment for discriminatory reasons, and that a municipal ordinance forbids the firing of a town employee based on politics.
"We were able to discredit their reasons that they stated in court," Noble said. Our argument was that she was no different from any at-will employee. She is not a policymaker. You can't effectively decide not to put someone's name up because of discriminatory reasons."
Spriggs became a public defender for Plainfield in 2001 and she rose to the position of chief public defender in 2006, supervising two other employees.
She claimed in her suit that Mapp attempted to fire her for exercising her rights under the New Jersey Family Leave Act while her husband was suffering from cancer. When he was told he could not terminate her for applying for family leave, he said he would "just fire her," the suit claimed. Spriggs also said in the suit that she suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder stemming from an armed invasion of her home in 2012. She claimed that she applied for disability benefits for her PTSD but learned that the city had terminated her enrollment in the state disability plan. But the judge did not permit her attorneys to bring those issues before the jury.
In December 2019, a month after the close of discovery, Plainfield's lawyer sought to admit into evidence 68 pages of documents that were said to demonstrate that Mapp had introduced the names of numerous female applicants for various paid and nonpaid positions with the city. Lawyers for Spriggs opposed their admission, but the judge admitted portions of the documents that concerned appointments to paid positions.
John Gillick of Rainone Coughlin Minchello in Iselin represented Plainfield, Mapp and the city council at trial. He confirmed the verdict but declined to comment on the case. Mapp referred questions to Plainfield Corporation Counsel David Minchello, of the same firm, who said "we're surprised and disappointed with the jury verdict and reviewing our options with regard to an appeal."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMeet the Judges: Senate Confirms 7 Superior Court Nominees in Final 2024 Session
3 minute readAG Had No Authority to Take Control of Paterson PD, Appellate Division Says
4 minute read'Sad That We Have to Do This': Senate Judiciary Passes Bill Temporarily Addressing Public Notice Crisis
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250