Both sides had appealed a number of issues after a U.S. District Court jury in Cincinnati awarded Edelstein $1.1 million in February 2023. The upshot is she will get $1 million, barring further court action. The protracted litigation has cost the county and its insurance company $775,914.
Edelstein filed the $1 million lawsuit against Stephens, the county, Butler County Prosecutor Mike Gmoser and former chief assistant prosecutor Dan Ferguson in 2017, claiming Stephens fired her for wanting to take off eight Jewish high holy days and saying the men bad-mouthed her, destroying her career.
She also claimed the county’s policy of allowing Christians to have Christmas off without taking a vacation day is discriminatory. The federal court dismissed the county, Gmoser and Ferguson from the case in 2020.
Edelstein worked for Stephens after Judge Patricia Oney retired in early 2016. She told Stephens on July 28, 2016, she would need to take eight days off in October to observe Jewish high holy days.
She said Stephens reacted to her request by yelling, “Holy cow, eight days,” and he appeared to be angry, according to court filings. She was fired four days later.
The three-judge appellate panel upheld the district court post-trial ruling that $35,000 in punitive damages wasn’t warranted, the $835,000 back-pay award should be reduced by $20,444 and $250,000 in compensatory damages was fine, for a total of just more than $1 million.
The court noted Edelstein raised “13 arguments challenging various rulings made before, during, and after trial” and Stephens countered her assertions and raised four of his own.
Stephens’ attorney Linda Woeber filed a motion after the verdict asking U.S. District Court Judge Michael R. Barrett to rule that the evidence did not support the $1.1 million verdict or grant a new trial. Failing those she asked that the judgement be reduced because she said punitive damages weren’t warranted and the back-pay amount was erroneous.
The verdict has been slightly reduced but neither court bought the new trial request as the appellate panel wrote, “the evidence that Stephens retaliated against Edelstein was not so lacking as to warrant disturbing the jury’s verdict.”
“The evidence showed that Stephens discharged Edelstein on August 1, 2016, just four days after she requested eight days off to observe Jewish holidays in October,” the appeals court wrote. “When an employer takes an adverse action very soon after learning of an employee’s protected activity, the temporal proximity alone may be sufficient to establish the causation element.”
The court reiterated what Barrett found when he denied a new trial, that Edelstein produced evidence there was nothing in her personnel file to suggest her “purported inability to fit in and adapt to office changes that Stephens maintains were the reasons for her termination.”
“Although Stephens testified and presented evidence that he decided to discharge Edelstein because she had conflicts with staff members and was unadaptable, the jury was entitled to disbelieve his testimony and conclude that his motivation was in fact retaliatory,” the court wrote.
Edelstein raised issues about Barrett’s decisions on numerous things including excluded testimony and evidence, “prejudicial” jury instructions, the back pay reduction, the verdict form and even referring to Stephens as “judge” during trial rather than “Mr. Stephens” among others.
The appeals court tossed all of her complaints.
A big point of contention was dismissing the county from the lawsuit and the impact on “vicarious liability.” Questions were raised after the verdict was announced whether Stephens is personally responsible or if the county is on the hook. In court filings Edelstein maintains the county is, “Butler County should not have been excused from the lawsuit as they are financially liable for Stephens’ actions.”
Legal fees in this case are the highest by far in recent lawsuit history at $775,914. County taxpayers have paid the $100,000 deductible and their insurance company the County Risk Sharing Authority (CORSA) has paid the rest. Now that the verdict appears solid, the question becomes who pays that.
The appeals court found she misapplied the state discrimination statutes in her amended complaint.
“She emphasized Stephens’ alleged misconduct and expressly claimed that Stephens’ misconduct is prohibited by and actionable under 4112.02(I) and 4112.02(J). Those two subsections apply to individuals, not employers...” the court wrote. “Because Butler County was not named a defendant in connection with Edelstein’s state-law discrimination claim under § 4112.02, she cannot now argue that the county should have remained in the case for vicarious-liability purposes."
Edlestein could not be reached for comment and neither could Stephens. Woeber told the Journal-News she could not comment on the decision and whether she will ask the entire appeal court to consider the case en banc.
About the Author