Lucasfilm Gets $1.2 Million Pregnancy Bias Verdict Overturned

An appeals court orders a retrial in a case involving a woman hired to work at George Lucas' home who never started after becoming pregnant.

A California appellate court has reversed a $1.2 million pregnancy discrimination verdict against Lucasfilm, finding that an error in jury instructions led to a prejudicial ruling.

The lawsuit came from Julie Veronese, who was hired to be an assistant to the manager of George Lucas's home. But Veronese never really got started in the role. Soon after she was hired, she became pregnant and her employment was later terminated. She sued and won several of her discrimination claims in an ensuing trial, but on Monday, an appellate court says the jury should have been more specifically directed to examine whether her firing was motivated by discrimination related to her being pregnant.

Veronese is a San Francisco native who was well connected in the Bay Area. (Her husband is the grandson of the city's late mayor Joseph Alioto.) She was asked in the spring of 2008 by a Lucasfilm recruiter to interview for a position where the responsibilities included taking care of Lucas' estate in San Anselmo, a large complex with as many as nine houses on it. The job was considered by Lucasfilm HR to be less than glamorous with many menial duties.
During the interview, among the questions she got was whether she wanted to have children, to which Veronese responded, "Yes."

After the interview, over the next few weeks, Veronese had more discussions and did some "shadowing" of Sarita Patel, Lucas' estate manager.

Lucasfilm appealed the verdict. The company was upset that at the trial, the judge didn't issue this jury instruction:

                      "You may not find that Lucasfilm discriminated or retaliated against Julie Gilman Veronese based upon a blelief that Lucasfilm made a wrong or unfair decision. Likewise, you cannot find liability for discrimination or retaliation if you find that Lucasfilm made an error in business judgment. Instead, Lucasfilm can only be liable to Julie Gilman Veronese if the decisions made were motivated by discrimination or retaliation related to her being pregnant."

Reviewing the failure to issue the instruction, a three-judge panel at California's First Appellate District says it was a "prejudicial error."

Read More: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/lucasfilm-gets-12-million-pregnancy-400495