Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-3_06-cv-00449/USCOURTS-almd-3_06-cv-00449-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)

---

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION

KIM FOREMAN, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 3:06cv449-MHT

) (WO) 

MASTERBRAND CABINETS, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

JUDGMENT

On the 10th day of September, 2007, after this cause

had been submitted to a jury, a verdict was returned as

follows:

Race-Discrimination Claim

1. Has Kim Foreman proved by a preponderance of

the evidence that her race was a substantial or

motivating factor for the decision by Masterband

to terminate her, even though other factors may

have also motivated Masterbrand?

Yes ______

No X 

If the answer to question 1 is “no,” then you

will have found that Foreman may not recover

against Masterbrand on this claim, and you need

Case 3:06-cv-00449-MHT-WC Document 71 Filed 09/11/07 Page 1 of 5
2

not answer question 2, but should go directly to

question 3. If the answer to question 1 is

“yes,” then you need to answer question 2.

XXX

Sex-Discrimination Claim

3. Has Kim Foreman proved by a preponderance of

the evidence that her sex was a substantial or

motivating factor for the decision by Masterband

to terminate her, even though other factors may

have also motivated Masterbrand?

Yes X 

No ______

If the answer to question 3 is “no,” then you

will have found that Foreman may not recover

against Masterbrand on this claim, and you need

not answer question 4. If the answer to question

3 is “yes,” then you need to answer question 4.

4. Has Masterbrand proved by a preponderance of

the evidence that it would have taken the same

adverse employment action against Foreman even

in the absence of the factor of her sex?

Yes ______

No X 

If the answer to question 3 is “yes” and the

answer to question 4 is “no,” then you will have

found that Foreman may recover against

Masterbrand on this claim.

Case 3:06-cv-00449-MHT-WC Document 71 Filed 09/11/07 Page 2 of 5
3

Damages

5. If you find that Foreman may recover on

either or both of her claims against

Masterbrand, how much may she recover in

compensatory damages?

a. Emotional distress $ 0 

b. Lost earnings $ 44,901.48

6. If you find that, according to the court’s

instructions, Foreman may recover on either or both

of her claims against Masterbrand, how much, if

anything, may she recover in punitive damages?

$ 55,498.52

SO SAY WE ALL.

DONE, this the 10 day of September, 2007.

 /s/ W. Wesley Williams 

FOREPERSON

It is therefore the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of

the court as follows:

(1) Judgment is entered in favor of defendant

Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc., and against plaintiff Kim

Foreman on plaintiff Foreman’s race-discrimination claim,

with plaintiff Foreman taking nothing by said claim.

Case 3:06-cv-00449-MHT-WC Document 71 Filed 09/11/07 Page 3 of 5
4

(2) Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff Foreman

and against defendant Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc. on

plaintiff Foreman’s sex-discrimination claim.

(3) Plaintiff Foreman shall have and recover from

defendant Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc., the sum of

$ 44,901.48 in compensatory damages for lost earnings.

(4) Plaintiff Foreman shall have and recover from

defendant Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc., the additional sum

of $ 55,498.52 in punitive damages.

It is further ORDERED as follows:

(1) Plaintiff Foreman is allowed until September 21,

2007, to file any motion for reinstatement or other

equitable relief.

(2) Plaintiff Foreman is allowed until September 28,

2007, to file any motion for attorneys fees.

It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against

defendant Masterbrand Cabinets, Inc., for which execution

may issue.

Case 3:06-cv-00449-MHT-WC Document 71 Filed 09/11/07 Page 4 of 5
The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this

document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant

to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

DONE, this the 11th day of September, 2007.

 /s/ Myron H. Thompson 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00449-MHT-WC Document 71 Filed 09/11/07 Page 5 of 5