Jefferson County Jury Issues Defense Verdict in Sexual Harassment and Retaliation
A supervisor alleged sexual harassment by a subordinate and subsequent retaliation when she reported the conduct. The supervisor claimed the harassment was severe and pervasive, and that she was fired for complaining. The jury found against the supervisor on both claims, resulting in a defense judgment.
Case Information Updated: October 2025
Case Outcome
- Outcome
- Verdict-Defense
- Amount
- $150,478
- County
- Jefferson County, KY
- Resolved
- 2016
Injury & Accident Details
- Injury Type
- Psychological / PTSD
- Accident Type
- Other
- Case Type
- Civil Procedure, Criminal Law and Procedure, Labor and Employment Law, Torts
Settlement Context
This verdict-defense of $150,478 is above the median of $38,000 for psychological / ptsd cases resolved by verdict-defense. The typical range is Undisclosed to $150,478, based on 4 cases in our database.
Case Overview
A supervisor in the Jefferson County Clerk's Office alleged she experienced sexual harassment from a subordinate, which included offensive remarks, groping, and the subordinate sleeping in her office with romantic intent. The plaintiff reported the conduct to the County Clerk, but claimed no action was taken. Shortly after making her complaints, the plaintiff was fired, with the county clerk citing performance problems, specifically an inability to prepare reports, as the reason. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit, alleging a sexually hostile work environment and retaliatory termination.
A trial court initially dismissed the case, concluding the alleged harassment was not sufficiently severe or pervasive as a matter of law. The Kentucky Court of Appeals later reversed this decision, finding the plaintiff had presented a prima facie case for both sexual harassment and retaliation claims, and remanded the case for trial. At trial, the subordinate denied the harassment occurred. The defense argued that any alleged harassment was not severe or pervasive enough to be legally actionable and contended the plaintiff did not complain about the subordinate until after her termination, asserting she was fired for performance issues, not in retaliation.
The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defense, rejecting both the hostile work environment and retaliatory termination claims. The jury specifically found the plaintiff failed to prove the harassment was severe and pervasive and that her termination was not a result of her complaints. A judgment was entered for the defense. The plaintiff moved for a new trial, citing a subpoenaed witness from the clerk's office failed to appear. The court denied the motion, noting the plaintiff possessed the witness's deposition and chose not to use it at trial. The plaintiff subsequently appealed the judgment.
Understanding This Case
- This case went to trial and resulted in a jury verdict. Verdicts can yield higher awards but carry the risk of receiving nothing if the jury rules against the plaintiff.
- This case was resolved in Jefferson County, Kentucky. Local jury tendencies, judge assignments, and regional economic conditions all influence case outcomes in this jurisdiction.
- Resolved in 2016, this case reflects the legal and economic conditions of that period, including medical costs, insurance practices, and jury award trends at the time.
VerdictlyTM Score
This outcome significantly deviates from similar cases
This score is calculated by analyzing injury type, accident details, geographic location, temporal trends, and comparing against 2,000+ similar cases in our database.
Want to understand your case value?
Get a free case evaluation to understand what your motor vehicle accident case might be worth based on cases like this in Jefferson County.
Similar cases you may find useful
Handpicked by matching injury type, accident details, and outcome to this case.
A plaintiff alleged bilateral rotator cuff injuries resulted from paramedics' forceful removal of the plaintiff from a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants, presumably alleging negligence in the plaintiff's care. The court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment in September 2006, concluding the case in favor of the defense.
The employer, Star*Tel Systems, appealed a decision by an administrative law judge in Kentucky. The judge had previously determined that an employee sustained a permanent and total disability following a work-related motor vehicle accident. The appeal challenged the judge's opinion, order, and award.
A collision occurred on September 20, 2012, on Kentucky Avenue near Floyd Street in Louisville. The plaintiff, then age 41, was making a right turn when the defendant pulled from a space to the plaintiff's right, resulting in the crash. The plaintiff sustained a rotator cuff injury that required surgical repair. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit, alleging the defendant negligently pulled from a parking lane into the plaintiff's path. The plaintiff sought $3,917 for past medical expenses, up to $15,000 for future medicals, and $120,000 for pain and suffering. The defendant denied liability, arguing she was in a turn lane, not a parking lane. An independent medical examiner for the defense also linked the plaintiff's shoulder issues to pre-existing degenerative conditions. Following a trial, a jury found in favor of the defendant on the issue of liability. A defense judgment was subsequently entered, and the plaintiff received no damages.
A lawsuit stemmed from a rear-end vehicle collision in Lexington, Kentucky, alleging negligent operation of a vehicle. Few additional details regarding the incident or the specific allegations made by the plaintiff were available from the record. The defendant in the case retained an orthopedic surgery expert. The resolution of the litigation was not specified.
A personal injury case arose from an auto accident. The plaintiff retained an expert in economics to assess damages. The defendant presented experts in emergency medicine, biomechanics, and accident reconstruction, suggesting disputes over the nature or cause of injuries. An occupational therapy expert also participated in the case. The matter proceeded to a trial, which concluded on December 9, 2016. Details regarding the verdict or any award were not specified in the record.
Explore More Cases Like This
Browse similar cases by injury type and location to get a better understanding of case values in your area.