Ellen Pao's pursuit of punitive damages
Pao, a former partner, is suing the venture capital powerhouse for $16 million in lost wages and future compensation as well as an unspecified amount in punitive damages that may reach far beyond that figure. Kleiner Perkins' motion would not have affected the $16 million figure but it would have put an end to extra damages on top of that number that may be determined by the jury.
In a surprise move on Tuesday, Judge Harold Kahn announced that he was considering taking the claim for punitive damages off the table because Pao's lawyers had not made a convincing enough case that anyone at Kleiner Perkins acted with "malice, fraud or oppression" against Pao, the legal standard for punitive damages under California law.
But on Saturday morning, Kahn ruled that there was in fact sufficient evidence to allow Pao's bid to stand, after weighing legal briefings and evidence from each side.
"There is sufficient evidence from which a reasonable juror could conclude that Kleiner Perkins engaged in intentional gender discrimination by failing to promote Ms. Pao and terminating her employment and that Kleiner Perkins attempted to hide its illegal conduct by offering knowingly false and pretextual explanations for its decisions not to promote Ms. Pao and to terminate her employment," the decision read.
Pao has alleged that she was denied promotions, retaliated against and ultimately fired because of the firm's deep-rooted sexism and the fact that she complained about it.
The judge's ruling was in response to one of two "non-suit" motions that Kleiner Perkins had filed after Pao's side rested its case on Monday. The motions were meant to give the judge the chance to throw out each of Pao's claims before the jury had the chance to decide, but they were filed mostly as a procedural matter without much expectation that they would pass.
Kahn said in the ruling that, according to state law, non-suit motions must be decided by looking at the evidence in the most favorable light for Pao. That means that any any "presumptions, inferences and doubts" must be decided in the best possible way for Pao's case.
The ruling is a big win for Pao's lawyers because it means that Pao still has a shot at a payout much greater than the $16 million if the jury decides that malice was at play during deliberations next week. Punitive damages are typically much higher than those related to compensation because they are meant to punish the defendant for acting with a harmful intent.
On Friday, after the jury had left for the day, Pao's lawyers argued that there was plenty of "despicable conduct" in the case and that Kleiner Perkins' investigation into her complaints was intentionally biased. Attorneys for the defense rebutted that her departure from the firm had been handled fairly and kindly and that the reasons she was fired were well-documented.
Kleiner Perkins rested its case on Friday after running through roster of witnesses including current and former employees and various experts as the high-stakes trial wrapped up its fourth week. Closing arguments are set to begin on Tuesday and a verdict may be reached as early as the end of next week.
Post a Comment