Jury That Made $10-Million Klein-Davis Trial Award Is Under Scrutiny
Like a slow-motion replay of a close fourth-down play, the jury that awarded former San Diego Chargers owner Eugene Klein $10 million in his malicious prosecution suit against Al Davis and the Los Angeles Raiders is coming under close scrutiny in post-trial maneuverings.
Ten days ago, attorneys for Davis and the Raiders filed allegations of jury misconduct in the case, alleging that the San Diego jurors harbored a deep-seated bias against the Chargers’ archrivals.
On Monday, Klein’s legal team struck back with its own hail of filings--including sworn statements by 10 of the 12 jurors that their deliberations were impartial and statements from two alternate jurors challenging the credibility of an alternate who has taken Davis’ side in the brouhaha.
San Diego County Superior Court Judge Gilbert Harelson will come out of retirement April 7 to conduct a hearing on the jury misconduct charges. He presided in the two-phase trial that ended in January with the jury’s holding Davis responsible for a heart attack Klein suffered on the witness stand in a Los Angeles courtroom as he testified in the Raiders’ antitrust lawsuit against the National Football League in 1982.
The Raiders have requested that Harelson reverse the verdict and clear Davis of Klein’s allegations. Failing that, they want him to order a new trial.
Statement Basis of Request
Their request is based largely on a sworn statement from alternate juror Stacey Thomas, who called Davis after the jury made its initial award of $5 million in compensatory damages to say that Davis had been victimized because the jury was biased against him and his lawyers.
Raiders’ attorneys also claim that the jury was confused by the split nature of the proceedings: first the jurors deliberated over Davis’ liability and the proper amount to award Klein to compensate for his medical costs and suffering; then, more than a month later, they reconvened to consider the punitive damages against Davis and the Raiders.
In their filings Monday, Klein’s attorneys countered both claims of misconduct. In sworn statements, 10 of the 12 jurors said the deliberations were fair and that there was no confusion created by the fact the trial had two phases.
Moreover, two alternate jurors provided statements criticizing Thomas’ conduct. Alternate juror Margaret E. Smith said Thomas had talked in a courthouse restroom with a woman whom other jurors believed worked for one of Davis’ lawyers. Smith stated that Thomas worked on grocery lists during testimony in the trial and violated Harelson’s directions by reading newspapers and discussing the case with other jurors.
In her statement, alternate juror Monica Woodruff said she heard Thomas say in the jury lounge one day that she “felt sorry” for Al Davis.
Question of Believability
Lawyers for the two sides each insist that the jurors who support their position are the ones who should be believed.
“It’s a question of who’s telling the truth,” said Joseph Alioto, former mayor of San Francisco and head of the Raiders’ legal squad. “I never predict what judges or juries are going to do. But it’s clear to me there’s a miscarriage of justice here.”
Frank Pitre, one of Klein’s attorneys, said that the only injustice was in the harsh treatment the jury received at the hands of Davis and his attorneys.
“The jurors spoke to me because they were outraged their verdict was being labeled hysteria and confusion,” Pitre said. “In speaking to the jurors, I was told without question that there was no confusion in that jury room.”