Topeka’s city government requested a new trial or a judgment in its favor Thursday in a federal gender discrimination lawsuit it lost Sept. 19, saying U.S. District Judge John W. Broomes made errors that irreparably harmed the city’s rights, including allowing irrelevant testimony that confused the jury.
Jurors, who awarded nearly $489,000 to Topeka police Maj. Jana Kizzar and Capt. Colleen Stuart after concluding the city discriminated against them on the basis of gender, placed significant weight on testimony they heard from Topeka police Capt. Jennifer Cross, who shouldn’t have been allowed to testy, the city said in a motion it filed in federal court.
Jurors reached a verdict after less than two hours’ deliberation, the motion said, adding that the jury’s foreman spoke after the trial to an attorney for Kizzar and Stuart, who later spoke with an attorney for the city.
“According to the jury foreman, the jury found Jennifer Cross’ testimony to hold significant weight and advised that her testimony was considered frequently during their deliberations, further proving that her irrelevant nepotism-based complaints allowed in through her testimony did nothing but confuse and mislead the jury,” it said.
City says ‘me too’ evidence was improperly introduced at trial
Topeka attorneys J. Philip Gragson and Kara L. Eisenhut, who are working under contract to represent the city in the case, said in Thursday’s motion that the court made errors that included allowing the testimony in its entirety of witnesses Cross and female Topeka police Sgt. Kim Hanika.
Cross and Hanika improperly provided “me too” evidence by testifying about situations in which they thought the city discriminated against them, the city’s motion said.
It stressed that a discrimination suit Cross pursued against the city had been thrown out without a trial last August.
“This court erred in that it failed to consider that a ‘me too’ witness testifies to ‘alleged discrimination,'” the motion said. “This is discrimination that is being alleged that has not yet had the chance to be put in front of a jury to determine if it actually did amount to discrimination.”
The court further erred in allowing Cross’ testimony because it had already ruled that testimony provided asdocumenting “alleged discrimination” does not amount to evidence of discrimination, the motion said.
“Consequently, having made that determination but then allowing such evidence to be presented to the jury as ‘alleged discrimination’ was not only against the law of the case doctrine, but extremely prejudicial, confusing and misleading for the jury,” the motion said. “It was further unfair to Defendant who was prevented from telling the jury that the Court had already ruled that Ms. Cross’ claim had been dismissed on summary judgment.”
Thursday’s motion also contended the court erred by allowing the admission of “certain portions” of testimony by three other witnesses, all former or current city employees.
Here’s the background on Kizzar and Stuart’s suit
Kizzar, Stuart and Cross filed suit in January 2023 alleging the city discriminated against them by twice choosing less-qualified men for promotion over Kizzar and Stuart and once choosing a less-qualified man for promotion over Cross.
A federal judge last August allowed Kizzar and Stuart to proceed with one of their claims but threw out the others, including the claim by Cross, who has since initiated a new lawsuit against the city.
A federal jury ruled Sept. 19 that Topeka’s city government discriminated on the basis of gender against Kizzar and Stuart.
Kizzar, Stuart and Cross remain with the Topeka Police Department.
Contact Tim Hrenchir at [email protected] or 785-213-5934.
This article originally appeared on Topeka Capital-Journal: City of Topeka seeks new trial in gender discrimination suit it lost
#city #Topeka #seeking #trial #gender #discrimination #suit #lost
