IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

WESTERN DIVISION





PATTY ERICKSON-PUTTMANN,
Plaintiff,

No. C 01-4007-MWB

vs.



PRELIMINARY AND FINAL INSTRUCTIONS

TO THE JURY

WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA,
Defendant.

____________________





TABLE OF CONTENTS

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS 1

NO. 1 - PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS 1

NO. 2 - DUTY OF JURORS 2

NO. 3 - BURDEN OF PROOF 3

NO. 4 - ELEMENTS OF PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM 4

NO. 5 - ORDER OF TRIAL 6

NO. 6 - DEFINITION OF EVIDENCE 7

NO. 7 - CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES 8

NO. 8 - STIPULATED FACTS 9

NO. 9 - DEPOSITIONS 10

NO. 10 - INTERROGATORIES 11

NO. 11 - OBJECTIONS 12

NO. 12 - BENCH CONFERENCES 13

NO. 13 - NOTE-TAKING 14

NO. 14 - CONDUCT OF JURORS DURING TRIAL 15

FINAL INSTRUCTIONS 17

NO. 1 - INTRODUCTION 17

NO. 2 - IMPEACHMENT OF WITNESSES 18

NO. 3 - SEXUAL HARASSMENT 19

NO. 4 - DAMAGES--IN GENERAL 23

NO. 5 - DAMAGES--SPECIFIC ITEMS 25

NO. 6 - DELIBERATIONS 26



VERDICT FORM

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 1 - PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS



Members of the jury, before the lawyers make their opening statements, I give you these preliminary instructions to help you better understand the trial and your role in it. Consider these instructions, together with any oral instructions given to you during the trial and the written final instructions given at the end of the trial, and apply them as a whole to the facts of the case. In considering these instructions, the order in which they are given is not important.



PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 2 - DUTY OF JURORS



It will be your duty to decide from the evidence what the facts are. You, and you alone, are the judges of the facts. You will hear the evidence, decide what the facts are and then apply those facts to the law which I will give you in these preliminary instructions, any instructions given during the trial, and in the final instructions at the conclusion of the case. You will then deliberate and reach your verdict. You are the sole judges of the facts; but you must follow the law as stated in my instructions, whether you agree with it or not.

You have been chosen and sworn as jurors in this case to try the issues of fact presented by the parties. Do not allow sympathy or prejudice to influence you. The law demands of you a just verdict, unaffected by anything except the evidence, your common sense, and the law as I will give it to you.

This case should be considered and decided by you as an action between persons of equal standing in the community, of equal worth, and holding the same or similar stations in life. In this case, defendant Woodbury County is a governmental subdivision. The mere fact that a party is a governmental subdivision does not mean that it is entitled to any greater or lesser consideration by you. All persons, including the plaintiff and Woodbury County, stand equal before the law, and are entitled to the same fair consideration by you. When a governmental subdivision such as Woodbury County is involved, of course, it may act only through natural persons, such as members of the Board of Supervisors, as its agents.

You should not take anything I may say or do during the trial as indicating what I think of the evidence or what I think your verdict should be.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 3 - BURDEN OF PROOF



In these instructions, you are told that your verdict depends on whether you find certain facts have been proved. The burden of proving a fact is upon the party whose claim depends upon that fact, in this case, plaintiff Patty Erickson-Puttmann. As the party with the burden of proof, she must prove facts by the "greater weight of the evidence." To prove something "by the greater weight of the evidence" means to prove that it is more likely true than not true. The "greater weight of the evidence" is determined by considering all of the evidence and deciding which evidence is more believable. If, on any issue in the case, you find that the evidence is equally balanced, then you cannot find that the issue has been proved.

The "greater weight of the evidence" is not necessarily determined by the greater number of witnesses or exhibits a party has presented. The testimony of a single witness that produces in your mind a belief in the likelihood of truth is sufficient for proof of any fact and would justify a verdict in accordance with such testimony. This is so, even though a number of witnesses may have testified to the contrary, if after consideration of all of the evidence in the case, you hold a greater belief in the accuracy and reliability of that one witness.

You may have heard of the term "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." That is a stricter standard, which applies in criminal cases. It does not apply in civil cases such as this. You should, therefore, put it out of your minds.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 4 - ELEMENTS OF PLAINTIFF'S CLAIM



As I explained during jury selection, plaintiff Patty Erickson-Puttmann contends that she was sexually harassed in her work place by an elected official in another department of County government, Patrick Gill, the Woodbury County Auditor and Recorder, that she complained about the harassment to members of the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors, but that the Board failed to take steps reasonably calculated to stop the harassment. Her "sexual harassment" claim consists of "elements," which she must prove by the greater weight of the evidence if she is to win on that claim. To help you follow the evidence, here is a brief summary of the elements of Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's sexual harassment claim:

One, Ms. Erickson-Puttmann was subjected to offensive conduct or conditions imposed by Patrick Gill, the Woodbury County Auditor and Recorder;

Two, such conduct was based on Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's sex;

Three, such conduct was unwelcome;

Four, at the time that such conduct occurred, and as a result of such conduct, Ms. Erickson-Puttmann believed her work environment to be hostile or abusive;

Five, such conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive that a reasonable person in Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's position would find her work environment hostile or abusive;

Six, the County knew or should have known of the harassment; and

Seven, the County failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action to end the harassment.

This is only a preliminary outline of the elements of Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's claim. At the end of the trial, I will give you further final written instructions that explain this claim. Because the final instructions are more detailed, those instructions govern on the elements of Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's claim.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 5 - ORDER OF TRIAL



The trial will proceed as follows:

After these preliminary instructions, the plaintiff's attorney may make an opening statement. Next, the lawyer for the defendant may make an opening statement. An opening statement is not evidence, but simply a summary of what the lawyer expects the evidence to be.

After opening statements, the plaintiff will present evidence and call witnesses and the lawyer for the defendant may cross-examine them. Following the plaintiff's case, the defendant may present evidence and call witnesses and the lawyer for the plaintiff may cross-examine them.

After the evidence is concluded, I will give you most of the final instructions. The lawyers will then make their closing arguments to summarize and interpret the evidence for you. As with opening statements, closing arguments are not evidence. I will then give you the remaining final instructions on deliberations, and you will retire to deliberate on your verdict.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 6 - DEFINITION OF EVIDENCE



Evidence is:

1. Testimony.

2. Exhibits I admit into evidence.

3. Stipulations, which are agreements between the parties.

Evidence may be "direct" or "circumstantial." The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to direct and circumstantial evidence. The weight to be given any evidence is for you to decide.

A particular item of evidence is sometimes admitted only for a limited purpose, and not for any other purpose. I will tell you if that happens, and instruct you on the purposes for which the item can and cannot be used.

The fact that an exhibit may be shown to you does not mean that you must rely on it more than you rely on other evidence.

The following are not evidence:

1. Statements, arguments, questions, and comments by the lawyers.

2. Objections and rulings on objections.

3. Testimony I tell you to disregard.

4. Anything you saw or heard about this case outside the courtroom.

The weight of the evidence is not determined by the number of witnesses testifying as to the existence or non-existence of any fact. Also, the weight of the evidence should not be determined merely by the number or volume of documents or exhibits. The weight of evidence depends on its quality, not quantity. The quality and weight of the evidence are for you to decide.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 7 - CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES



In deciding what the facts are, you may have to decide what testimony you believe and what testimony you do not believe. You may believe all of what a witness says, only part of it, or none of it.

In deciding what testimony to believe, consider the witness's intelligence, the opportunity the witness had to have seen or heard the things testified about, the witness's memory, any motives that witness may have for testifying a certain way, the manner of the witness while testifying, whether that witness said something different at an earlier time, the witness's drug or alcohol use or addiction, if any, the general reasonableness of the testimony, and the extent to which the testimony is consistent with any evidence that you believe. In deciding whether or not to believe a witness, keep in mind that people sometimes see or hear things differently and sometimes forget things. You need to consider, therefore, whether a contradiction results from an innocent misrecollection or sincere lapse of memory, or instead from an intentional falsehood or pretended lapse of memory.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 8 - STIPULATED FACTS



The plaintiff and the defendant have agreed or "stipulated" to certain facts and have reduced these facts to a written agreement or stipulation. Either counsel may, throughout the trial, read to you all or a portion of the stipulated facts. You should treat these stipulated facts as having been proved.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 9 - DEPOSITIONS



Certain testimony from a deposition may be read into evidence. A deposition is testimony taken under oath before the trial and preserved in writing. Consider that testimony as if it had been given in court.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 10 - INTERROGATORIES



During this trial, you may hear the word "interrogatory." An interrogatory is a written question asked by one party of another, who must answer it under oath in writing. Consider interrogatories and the answers to them as if the questions had been asked and answered here in court.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 11 - OBJECTIONS



The lawyers may make objections and motions during the trial that I must rule upon. If I sustain an objection to a question before it is answered, do not draw any inferences or conclusions from the question itself. Also, the lawyers have a duty to object to testimony or other evidence that they believe is not properly admissible. Do not hold it against a lawyer or the party the lawyer represents because the lawyer has made objections.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 12 - BENCH CONFERENCES



During the trial it may be necessary for me to talk with the lawyers out of the hearing of the jury, either by having a bench conference here while the jury is present in the courtroom, or by calling a recess. Please be patient, because while you are waiting, we are working. The purpose of these conferences is to decide how certain evidence is to be treated under the rules of evidence, to avoid confusion and error, and to save your valuable time. We will, of course, do what we can to keep the number and length of these conferences to a minimum.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 13 - NOTE-TAKING



If you want to take notes during the trial, you may, but be sure that your note-taking does not interfere with listening to and considering all the evidence. If you choose not to take notes, remember that it is your own individual responsibility to listen carefully to the evidence.

Notes you take during the trial are not necessarily more reliable than your memory or another juror's memory. Therefore, you should not be overly influenced by the notes.

If you take notes, do not discuss them with anyone before you begin your deliberations. At the end of each day, please leave your notes on your chair. At the end of the trial, you may take your notes out of the notebook and keep them, or leave them, and we will destroy them. No one will read the notes, either during or after the trial.

You will notice that we have an official court reporter making a record of the trial. However, we will not have typewritten transcripts of this record available for your use in reaching your verdict.

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTION NO. 14 - CONDUCT OF JURORS

DURING TRIAL





You will not be required to remain together while court is in recess. However, to insure fairness, you as jurors must obey the following rules:

First, do not talk among yourselves about this case, or about anyone involved with it, until the end of the case when you go to the jury room to decide on your verdict.

Second, do not talk with anyone else about this case, or about anyone involved with it, until the trial has ended and you have been discharged as jurors.

Third, when you are outside the courtroom do not let anyone tell you anything about the case, or about anyone involved with it until the trial has ended and your verdict has been accepted by me. If someone should try to talk to you about the case during the trial, please report it to me.

Fourth, during the trial you should not talk with or speak to any of the parties, lawyers, or witnesses involved in this case--you should not even pass the time of day with any of them. It is important that you not only do justice in this case, but that you also give the appearance of doing justice. If a person from one side of the case sees you talking to a person from the other side--even if it is simply to pass the time of day--an unwarranted and unnecessary suspicion about your fairness might be aroused. If any lawyer, party, or witness does not speak to you when you pass in the hall, ride the elevator or the like, it is because they are not supposed to talk or visit with you.

Fifth, do not read any news stories or articles about the case, or about anyone involved with it, or listen to any radio or television reports about the case or about anyone involved with it. If you want, you can have your spouse or a friend clip out any stories and set them aside to give you after the trial is over. I can assure you, however, that by the time you have heard the evidence in this case you will know more about the matter than anyone will learn through the news media.

Sixth, do not do any research or make any investigation about the case on your own.

Seventh, do not make up your mind during the trial about what the verdict should be. Keep an open mind until after you have gone to the jury room to decide the case and you and your fellow jurors have discussed the evidence.

Eighth, if at anytime during the trial you have a problem that you would like to bring to my attention, or if you feel ill or need to go to the restroom, please send a note to the Court Security Officer, who will deliver it to me. I want you to be comfortable, so please do not hesitate to inform me of any problem.

DATED this 5th day of June, 2002.



FINAL INSTRUCTION NO. 1 - INTRODUCTION



Members of the jury, the written instructions I gave you at the beginning of the trial and the oral instructions I gave you during the trial remain in effect. I now give you some additional instructions.

The instructions I am about to give you, as well as the preliminary instructions given to you at the beginning of the trial, are in writing and will be available to you in the jury room. All instructions, whenever given and whether in writing or not, must be followed. This is true even though some of the instructions I gave you at the beginning of the trial are not repeated here.

In considering these instructions, the order in which they are given is not important.

Neither in these instructions nor in any ruling, action, or remark that I have made during the course of this trial have I intended to give any opinion or suggestion as to what your verdict should be.

FINAL INSTRUCTION NO. 2 - IMPEACHMENT OF WITNESSES



In Preliminary Instruction No. 7, I instructed you on the credibility of witnesses. I now give you this further instruction on how the credibility of a witness can be "impeached."

A witness may be discredited or impeached by contradictory evidence; by a showing that the witness testified falsely concerning a material matter; or by evidence that at some other time the witness has said or done something, or has failed to say or do something, that is inconsistent with the witness's present testimony. If earlier statements of a witness were admitted into evidence, they were not admitted to prove that the contents of those statements were true. Instead, you may consider those earlier statements only to determine whether you think they are consistent or inconsistent with the trial testimony of the witness, and, therefore, whether they affect the credibility of that witness.

If you believe that a witness has been discredited or impeached, it is your exclusive right to give that witness's testimony whatever weight you think it deserves.

FINAL INSTRUCTION NO. 3 - SEXUAL HARASSMENT





Plaintiff Patty Erickson-Puttmann contends that she was sexually harassed in her work place by an elected official in another department of County government, Patrick Gill, the Woodbury County Auditor and Recorder, that she complained about the harassment to members of the Woodbury County Board of Supervisors, but that the Board failed to take steps reasonably calculated to stop the harassment. To win on her claim of "sexual harassment," Ms. Erickson-Puttmann must prove each of the following elements by the greater weight of the evidence:

One, Ms. Erickson-Puttmann was subjected to offensive conduct or conditions imposed by Patrick Gill, the Woodbury County Auditor and Recorder.

Ms. Erickson-Puttmann alleges that Patrick Gill harassed and intimidated her in one or more of the following ways:

(a) Telling Ann Long, the legal counsel to the Board of Supervisors, that Ms. Erickson-Puttmann should be terminated immediately for interference with an investigation of grant funds;

(b) Causing agents of the Iowa Department of Criminal Investigation (DCI) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to confront her at work and accuse her of withholding evidence in the grant fund investigation;

(c) Telling the Board of Supervisors that she had failed to comply with his requests for information;

(d) Publicly accusing her of proposing to use mental health funds to remodel the eighth floor of the Woodbury County Courthouse;

(e) Accusing her of refusing to turn over a tape recording of a meeting and accusing her of violating the Iowa Open Records Law;

(f) Accusing her of withholding public documents and also requesting that an Assistant Woodbury County Attorney have her arrested and have her office searched; and

(g) Suggesting in a televised interview that her civil rights complaint was the result of Mr. Gill's prior investigation of an alleged embezzlement of grant funds.



Two, such conduct was based on Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's sex.

Harassing conduct constitutes discrimination based on sex when members of one sex are exposed to conditions of employment to which members of the other sex are not exposed. The harassment need not be explicitly sexual in nature, nor must the plaintiff show that only women were subjected to harassment. However, she must prove by the greater weight of the evidence that women were the primary target of such harassment, that is, that a majority of Mr. Gill's harassing conduct was directed toward females.



Three, such conduct was unwelcome.

Conduct is "unwelcome" if the plaintiff did not solicit or invite the conduct and regarded the conduct as undesirable or offensive.



Four, at the time such conduct occurred, and as a result of such conduct, Ms. Erickson-Puttmann believed her work environment to be hostile or abusive.

The victim must in fact perceive the environment to be hostile or abusive.



Five, such conduct was sufficiently severe or pervasive that a reasonable person in Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's position would find her work environment hostile or abusive.

The objectionable environment must be both one that the plaintiff found hostile or abusive, and one that a reasonable person in her position would have found to be so. Whether an environment is sufficiently hostile or abusive must be determined by looking at all the circumstances, including the frequency of the discriminatory conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it unreasonably interferes with an employee's work performance. However, no single factor is required in order to find a work environment hostile or abusive. Federal anti-harassment law does not prohibit genuine but innocuous differences in the ways men and women routinely interact with members of the same sex and of the opposite sex. Therefore, simple teasing, offhand comments, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not amount to sexual harassment in the form of creation of a hostile environment.



Six, the County knew or should have known of the harassment.

The County knew or should have known of the harassment if authorized agents or supervisors with a reporting duty (or persons reasonably believed to have such a duty) acquired knowledge of sexual harassment.



Seven, the County failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action to end the harassment.

If the employer knows or should have known of harassment, the employer must undertake an investigation. The test of the adequacy of the investigation is its reasonableness in light of what the employer knew or should have known about the harassment and the seriousness of the harassment alleged. An investigation is not adequate if it is carried out in such a way that it prevents the discovery of serious and significant harassment, such that the remedy chosen by the employer cannot be reasonably calculated to prevent the harassment.

Similarly, an employer's decision to do nothing on the basis of an inadequate investigation supports a finding that the employer did not take prompt and appropriate corrective action. However, the law does not require that investigations into sexual harassment complaints be perfect, and an employer may take adequate remedial action even if its investigation was flawed. The ultimate question is whether the employer's remedial action was reasonably calculated to prevent further harassment.

The County may be responsible for sexual harassment of a County employee like Ms. Erickson-Puttmann by Mr. Gill, even though Mr. Gill is an elected official, Ms. Erickson-Puttmann did not work in his department, and he was not her supervisor, if the County knew or should have known of the harassment of its employee by Mr. Gill, but failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action to end the harassment. However, in deciding whether the County can be held responsible for harassment by Mr. Gill, you may consider the extent of the County's control over Mr. Gill. The reasonableness of an employer's remedy will depend on its ability to stop harassment by the person who engaged in the harassment. In evaluating the adequacy of the remedy, you may also take into account the remedy's ability to persuade potential harassers to refrain from unlawful conduct, even if the employer has no direct authority to control the conduct of such potential harassers. However, an employer is liable for the harassment if no remedy is undertaken, or if the remedy attempted is not reasonably likely to be effective.

Because it is not always possible for an employer to eliminate offensive behavior completely, your consideration of the effectiveness of the remedy should not look to whether offensive behavior actually ceased, but to whether the remedial and preventive action was reasonably calculated to end the harassment. Thus, an employer cannot be held liable if it did all that it reasonably could to stop the harassment.



If Ms. Erickson-Puttmann has failed to prove all seven of these elements by the greater weight of the evidence, your verdict must be for the County on Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's claim of sexual harassment. However, if you find that Ms. Erickson-Puttmann has proved all seven of these elements by the greater weight of the evidence, then she is entitled to damages in some amount on her claim of sexual harassment.

FINAL INSTRUCTION NO. 4 - DAMAGES--IN GENERAL





The fact that I am instructing you on the proper measure of damages should not be considered as an indication that I have any view as to which party is entitled to your verdict in this case. Instructions as to the measure of damages are given only for your guidance in the event that you should find that a plaintiff is entitled to damages in accord with the other instructions.

If you find that the plaintiff is entitled to damages on her claim, then you must award her such sum as you find by the greater weight of the evidence will fairly and justly compensate her for any damages that you find were proximately caused to her by the wrongful conduct of the defendant. An act is a "proximate cause" of damage if the act was a substantial factor in producing the damage and the damage would not have happened except for the act. "Substantial" means that the act had such an effect in producing damage as to lead a reasonable person to regard it as a cause of the damage.

In arriving at an amount of damages, you cannot establish a figure by taking down the estimate of each juror as to damages and agreeing in advance that the average of those estimates shall be your award of damages. Rather, you must use your sound judgment based upon an impartial consideration of the evidence.

Remember, throughout your deliberations, you must not engage in any speculation, guess, or conjecture. You must not award damages under these Instructions by way of punishment or through sympathy. Your judgment must not be exercised arbitrarily, or out of sympathy or prejudice, for or against any of the parties.

You must award the full amount of damages that the plaintiff has proved by the greater weight of the evidence. However, the amount you assess for damages must not exceed the amount caused by the wrongful conduct of the defendant as proved by the evidence.

Attached to these Instructions is a verdict form, which you must fill out. In the "Damages" section of the verdict form for each of the plaintiff's claims, you should only award those damages, if any, that the plaintiff has proved by the greater weight of the evidence.

FINAL INSTRUCTION NO. 5 - DAMAGES--SPECIFIC ITEMS



If you find in favor of Ms. Erickson-Puttmann on her sexual harassment claim, then you must award her such sum as you find by the greater weight of the evidence will fairly and justly compensate her for damages, if any, that you find were proximately caused by the wrongful conduct of the defendant.

Ms. Erickson-Puttmann seeks damages for "emotional distress." Damages for emotional distress are the amount of damages that will reasonably compensate Ms. Erickson-Puttmann for the emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life that was proximately caused by the wrongful conduct of the defendant. Damages for "past emotional distress" must compensate Ms. Erickson-Puttmann for any emotional distress that she suffered from the time of the wrongful conduct until the time you give your verdict. You may also award damages for "future emotional distress" to Ms. Erickson-Puttmann if you find that the evidence justifies the conclusion that, as a proximate cause of the harassing or discriminatory conduct of Mr. Gill, Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's emotional distress and its consequences can reasonably be expected to continue in the future. You do not have to reduce damages for future emotional distress, if any, to "present value."

The amount, if any, that you assess for damages for emotional distress cannot be measured by an exact or mathematical standard, and the plaintiff is not required to introduce evidence of the monetary value of such damages. However, you must use your sound judgment based upon an impartial consideration of the evidence to determine the amount of such damages.

FINAL INSTRUCTION NO. 6 - DELIBERATIONS



In conducting your deliberations and returning your verdict, there are certain rules you must follow.

First, when you go to the jury room, you must select one of your members as your foreperson. That person will preside over your discussions and speak for you here in court.

Second, it is your duty, as jurors, to discuss this case with one another in the jury room. You should try to reach agreement if you can do so without violence to individual judgment. Each of you must make your own conscientious decision, but only after you have considered all the evidence, discussed it fully with your fellow jurors, and listened to the views of your fellow jurors. Do not be afraid to change your opinions if the discussion persuades you that you should, but do not come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is right, or simply to reach a verdict. Remember at all times that you are not partisans. You are judges--judges of the facts. Your sole interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case.

Third, if you need to communicate with me during your deliberations, you may send a note to me through the Court Security Officer, signed by one or more jurors. I will respond as soon as possible either in writing or orally in open court. Remember that you should not tell anyone--including me--how your votes stand numerically.

Fourth, your verdict must be based solely on the evidence and on the law which I have given to you in my instructions. Nothing I have said or done is intended to suggest what your verdict should be--that is entirely for you to decide.

Finally, I am giving you the verdict form. A verdict form is simply the written notice of the decision that you reach in this case. Your verdict must be unanimous. You will take the verdict form to the jury room. When you have reached a unanimous verdict, your foreperson must complete one copy of the verdict form and all of you must sign that copy to record your individual agreement with the verdict and to show that it is unanimous. The foreperson must bring the signed verdict form to the courtroom when it is time to announce your verdict. When you have reached a verdict, the foreperson will advise the Court Security Officer that you are ready to return to the courtroom.

DATED this 6th day of June, 2002.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

WESTERN DIVISION



PATTY ERICKSON-PUTTMANN,
Plaintiff,

No. C 01-4007-MWB

vs.



VERDICT FORM

WOODBURY COUNTY, IOWA,
Defendant.

____________________



On the claim of plaintiff Patty Erickson-Puttmann, we, the Jury, find as follows:



SEXUAL HARASSMENT
Step 1:

Liability

On Ms. Erickson-Puttmann's claim of "sexual harassment," as explained in Final Jury Instruction No. 3, in whose favor do you find? ____ Ms. Erickson-Puttmann
____ Woodbury County





Step 2:

Damages

If you found in favor of Ms. Erickson-Puttmann on this claim, what amount of damages, if any, do you award for the following items, as damages are explained in Final Jury Instructions Nos. 4 and 5?



Past emotional distress


$ _________________


Future emotional distress


$ _________________




Date: ________________ Time: ________________





_______________________________

Foreperson

_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror





_______________________________

Juror





_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror