Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jones Appeal Difficult, But Not
Impossible
By Pierre
Thomas/CNN
WASHINGTON
(April 16) -- Judge
Susan Webber
Wright's sweeping
dismissal of Paula
Jones' lawsuit makes
an appeal extremely
difficult -- difficult, but not impossible.
Take, for instance, Jones' claim of emotional distress
she says she suffered at the hands of then-Gov. Bill
Clinton. "Mr. Clinton exposed himself to me that
day," Jones has said.
The idea that such behavior caused Jones no mental
anguish might be difficult for a higher court to
fathom,
says one expert.
"When Judge Wright dismissed the emotional distress
claim, it raised concerns among many people that this
claim is not unlike the claims of many women who
are not arguing employment injury but rather
emotional injury," said Jonathan Turley of George
Washington University Law School.
An appellate court might fear that blocking the Jones
case from going to trial would have a chilling effect
on hundreds of other sexual harassment cases.
But in her ruling Judge Wright found Jones incurred
no medical bills and never sought emotional
counseling.
In fact, Wright said Jones had no case, not for sexual
assault. The judge said, "The conduct as alleged by
plaintiff describes a mere sexual proposition or
encounter, albeit an odious one, that was relatively
brief in duration."
And Wright said
Jones had no case,
not for sexual
harassment. She
ruled Jones "has not
demonstrated any
tangible job detriment
or adverse
employments action
for her refusal to
submit to the
governor's alleged advances."
That argument may be difficult to overturn on appeal
and limits Jones' options, says one sexual harassment
expert.
"You have to show you weren't hired, you were
fired, you were denied a promotion you should have
gotten," attorney Lynne Bernabei said. "They are
pretty strict about the kinds of sort of serious
detriment you have to suffer in order to make out that
kind of claim."
But Bernabei says there is another important factor in
the Jones case. Her appeal would be heard by the
8th Circuit, a court that is largely Republican
appointed.
That presents a mixed blessing. "It's sort of a unique
case in that the Republican judges have been
precisely the judges that have been so hostile to sex
harassment cases. So in terms of ideology they
would be against her. In terms of political, they may
be for her," Bernabei said.
In fact, that very court ruled against Clinton, saying
he should face the Jones trial while he is still in
office.
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
