emily gallup - jury special verdict awarding $313,206 - family court whistleblower lawsuit against...

4
Emily Gallup v. Superior Court of Nevada Count} Superior Court of California, County of Sacrament Case No. 34-2011 -00106805-CU-OE-GDS SPECIAL VERDICT FORM L By- FILED OCT 12/2012 Deputy Cl U. .lEREIMIAI/l / We, the Jury, answer the questions submitted to us as follows: OUESTION 1: Did Emily Gallup have reasonable cause to believe that there was a violation of a state or federal statute, rule or regulation? Yes y No If your answer to Question 1 is yes, then answer Question 2. If you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form. OUESTION 2: Did Emily Gallup disclose her reasonable belief to a government or law enforcement agency (including her employer)? Yes Y No If your answer to Question 2 is yes, then answer Question 3. If you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form. OUESTION 3: Did the Superior Court of Nevada County subject Emily Gallup to an adverse employment action? Yes No If your answer to Question 3 is yes, then answer Question 4. Ifyou answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

DESCRIPTION

Emily Gallup lawsuit jury special verdict form awarding $313,206 to the family court whistleblower in her lawsuit against Nevada County Superior Court and court employees Sean Metroka, Thea Palmiere and Carmella Cellini. Gallup's attempts to report the problems to the Judicial Council and Administrative Office of the Courts were rebuffed. Sacramento Family Court News is a nonprofit journalism organization publishing original, independent news, aggregated news, news analysis, opinion, satire and parody. Unlike the Sacramento Bee, Daily Journal Corporation publications, and local broadcast media we are independent of corporate, shareholder, advertiser and government influence. Our independence from outside influence allows SFCN to investigate and publish the stories that the self-censoring Judicial Branch legal community and mainstream media often are reluctant to report.Like ProPublica, much of our work is public interest investigative journalism that "shines a light on the exploitation of the weak by the strong and on the failures of those in power to vindicate the trust placed in them." We report on virtually all family court issues including divorce, child custody and visitation, child and spousal support, attorney fees and sanctions, court procedure and policy, and appeals from family court. We cover the financial and socioeconomic power imbalances often prevalent in family court cases. Oligarchical factions exert significant influence over many government institutions in California, and Sacramento Family Court is no exception. Socioeconomically disadvantaged court users often are treated as second-class citizens by the court, which operates a two-track system of justice providing preferential treatment to litigants who can afford representation by members of the Sacramento County Bar Association Family Law Section, according to evidence compiled by family court watchdogs and whistleblowers.Sacramento Family Court News Home Page: http://sacramentocountyfamilycourtnews.blogspot.com

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Emily Gallup - Jury Special Verdict Awarding $313,206 - Family Court Whistleblower Lawsuit Against Nevada County Superior Court and Court Employees Sean Metroka, Thea Palmiere, Carmella

Emily Gallup v. Superior Court of Nevada Count} Superior Court of California, County of Sacrament

Case No. 34-2011 -00106805-CU-OE-GDS SPECIAL VERDICT FORM

L By-

FILED

OCT 12/2012

Deputy Cl U. .lEREIMIAI/l /

We, the Jury, answer the questions submitted to us as follows:

OUESTION 1:

Did Emily Gallup have reasonable cause to believe that there was a violation of a state or federal statute, rule or regulation?

Yes y No

If your answer to Question 1 is yes, then answer Question 2.

If you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

OUESTION 2:

Did Emily Gallup disclose her reasonable belief to a government or law enforcement agency (including her employer)?

Yes Y No

If your answer to Question 2 is yes, then answer Question 3.

If you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

OUESTION 3:

Did the Superior Court of Nevada County subject Emily Gallup to an adverse employment action?

Yes No

If your answer to Question 3 is yes, then answer Question 4.

Ifyou answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

Pat
SCFN-2014
Page 2: Emily Gallup - Jury Special Verdict Awarding $313,206 - Family Court Whistleblower Lawsuit Against Nevada County Superior Court and Court Employees Sean Metroka, Thea Palmiere, Carmella

OUESTION 4:

Was Emily Gallup's disclosure of a reasonable belief that there was a violation of a state or federal statute, rule or regulation a motivating reason for the Superior Court of Nevada County's decision to take such adverse employment action (i.e., retaliate) against Emily Gallup?

Yes Y No

If your answer to Question 4 is yes, then answer Question 5.

Ifyou answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

OUESTION 5:

If you find that the Superior Court of Nevada County's action, which is the subject of Emily Gallup's claim, was actually motivated by both retaliatory and non-retaliatory reasons, did the Superior Court of Nevada County establish by clear and convincing evidence that its legitimate reason, standing alone, would have induced it to make the same decision?

Yes W No X

If your answer to Question 5 is no, then answer Question 6.

If you answered yes, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

OUESTION 6:

Was Emily Gallup harmed?

Yes X No

If your answer to Question 6 is yes, then answer Question 7.

Ifyou answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

OUESTION 7:

Was the Superior Court of Nevada County's conduct a substantial factor in causing Emily Gallup's harm?

Yes No

Page 3: Emily Gallup - Jury Special Verdict Awarding $313,206 - Family Court Whistleblower Lawsuit Against Nevada County Superior Court and Court Employees Sean Metroka, Thea Palmiere, Carmella

If your answer to Question 7 is yes, then answers Questions 8 and 9.

Ifyou answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

OUESTION 8:

What are Emily Gallup's damages?

a. Past economic loss

Lost earnings/benefits $ jO^ia ^00

b. Future economic loss

Lost earnings/benefits $ ( fi^yOOO. 00

c. Past noneconomic loss [emotional distress]

d. Future noneconomic loss [emotional distress] $

TOTAL $ ••^1^^-2-0(^.00

OUESTION 9:

(a) Do you find that Emily Gallup took Carmella Smith's journal entries in June 2010 and disclosed them to other(s)?

Yes No Y If your answer is yes, then answer (b) below. Ifyou answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

(b) Was Emily Gallup dishonest about these actions by not disclosing them to the Court administration in December 2010?

Yes No

If your answer is yes, then answer (c) below. If you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

Page 4: Emily Gallup - Jury Special Verdict Awarding $313,206 - Family Court Whistleblower Lawsuit Against Nevada County Superior Court and Court Employees Sean Metroka, Thea Palmiere, Carmella

(c) Was Emily Gallup's misconduct sufficiently severe that the Superior Court of Nevada County would have discharged her because of that misconduct alone had the Superior Couit of Nevada County known of it?

Yes No

If your answer is yes, then answer (d) below. If you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

(d) Would the Superior Court of Nevada County have discharged Emily Gallup for her misconduct as a matter of settled company policy?

Yes No

Regardless of whether your answer to (d) above was yes or no, please have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

Signed: HmgTuror

Dated: [ 0 - i \ ' " ^ O O

After this verdict form has been signed, notify the clerk, bailiff or court attendant that you are ready to present your verdict in the courtroom.

Pat
SFCN-2014-Full