Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
UVA Rape Story Collapses; Duke Lacrosse Redux
Topic Started: Dec 5 2014, 01:45 PM (60,398 Views)
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
“Publishers will find a perverse incentive in this result: if you do the right thing by appending a correction, retraction, or apology to an online article as soon as you are aware that it may have problems, you risk ‘republishing’ the content and facing seven-figure liability,” Rolling Stone’s lawyers wrote. “Faced with these prospects, many reasonable publishers will choose to stay silent and not alert the public to concerns or errors in an article.


Ridiculous. You do the right thing because it is right. You don't knowingly publish a lie, or let a lie stand
afterwards (with all the harm that it does).

You worry about minor consequences (morally) to yourself (like monetary judgments) later.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.roanoke.com/news/education/higher_education/federal-judge-grants-stay-in-rolling-stone-eramo-decision/article_09cf1149-0cfc-5c62-9fd4-757cc98a7723.html

Federal judge grants stay in Rolling Stone, Eramo decision
Posted: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 4:14 pm

The (Charlottesville) Daily Progress

CHARLOTTESVILLE — A federal judge has agreed to temporarily suspend the enforcement of a jury’s verdict in the multimillion dollar defamation lawsuit that was found in favor of a University of Virginia administrator.

Last month, jurors awarded former UVa associate dean Nicole Eramo $3 million after finding that Rolling Stone magazine, its publisher and author Sabrina Rubin Erdely had defamed her with their November 2014 story “A Rape on Campus.”

The story’s centerpiece account of an alleged gang rape at an off-Grounds fraternity house was debunked quickly after the story’s release, leading to a firestorm of controversy and an eventual retraction of the story.

In a motion filed Monday, attorneys for the magazine asked Judge Glen Conrad to override the jurors’ verdict, challenging the finding that Erdely had acted with actual malice in scribing misleading statements about Eramo.

It further disputes the jury’s finding that the magazine republished the defamatory statements when it tacked an editor’s note to the top of the article acknowledging flaws in the reporting.

“If the jury’s verdict is allowed to stand, the severe legal risk of adding a warning editor’s note to a story will force publishers not to make the very disclosures that the law encourages,” reads a memorandum in support of the motion. “Such a result is not only at odds with the law, it flies in the face of common sense, public policy and the best interests of an informed public.”

On Tuesday, Conrad granted the motion to hold off on enforcing the verdict until the motion to overturn the verdict has been settled, writing that the magazine had shown “good cause” to do so. Eramo’s attorneys have not responded .
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.newsplex.com/content/news/Prominent-news-organizations-side-with-Rolling-Stone-in-Eramo-Lawsuit-405795515.html

Prominent news organizations side with Rolling Stone in Eramo Lawsuit

By Tomas Harmon |
Posted: Sat 5:42 PM, Dec 10, 2016

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. (NEWSPLEX) -- Several prominent news organizations have filed a motion in Charlottesville Federal Court in support of Rolling Stone Magazine.

The motion includes the American Society of News Editors, The Associated Press, Gannett Co., Inc., Landmark Media Enterprises, LLC, Online News Association, Radio Television Digital News Association, Society of Professional Journalists and The Washington Post.

According to the document, the eight news organizations want the judge to rule that the editor's note in the retracted Rolling Stone article published in December 2014, does not constitute a republishing of the article.

In November 2016, a jury found author Sabrina Erdely liable for defamation in the original November 2014 publication of the story "A Rape on Campus."

It found Rolling Stone magazine and its parent company Wenner Media liable for republication of the story after the editors became aware there were problems with the story but left it published online with an editor's note.

"Publishers should not be penalized for informing the public of developing information and explaining their news gathering decisions when inaccuracies are discovered," said the motion.

The eight organizations pointed to several other examples where news organizations retracted stories but left the original version up with an editor's notes.

Examples included The Washington Post, New York Times and "This American Life."

In the motion, the eight news organizations argue an editor's note serves more as a clarification, rather than a republication.

"This Court should encourage appending letters from the editor and notes to readers that set the record straight and avoid chilling debate on matters of public concern," the motion said.

A federal judge is now considering Rolling Stone's motion to set aside the verdict.

In the meantime, Former UVA Dean Nicole Eramo will have to wait for the almost $3 million she was awarded by the Jury.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
"This Court should encourage appending letters from the editor and notes to readers that set the record straight and avoid chilling debate on matters of public concern," the motion said.


What "sets the record straight" about an absolute lie, save for its total retraction and an abject apology?

There are no "ifs", "ands", or "buts", about a lie.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.roanoke.com/news/virginia/news-groups-motion-sides-in-part-with-rolling-stone/article_e11710cc-7c2b-5f0d-b9ff-a9f6cd409ee6.html

News groups’ motion sides in part with Rolling Stone

By Dean Seal The (Charlottesville) Daily Progress | Posted: Sunday, December 11, 2016 7:24 pm

CHARLOTTESVILLE — Nine news organizations are partially siding with Rolling Stone magazine in challenging the jury’s verdict in the recent multimillion-dollar defamation lawsuit won by University of Virginia administrator Nicole Eramo.

On Thursday, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press was joined by The Associated Press, The Washington Post and other organizations in a filing that supports Rolling Stone’s motion to override part of the jury’s Nov. 4 verdict in the high-profile case.

The suit was filed in May 2015 by Eramo, who alleged that she was defamed by Rolling Stone, its publisher and author Sabrina Rubin Erdely, who penned the now-retracted article “A Rape on Campus.” Published in November 2014, the piece was intended as an expose of the culture of sexual assault at elite universities.

Other news organizations found holes in the article’s centerpiece narrative, leading the magazine to append an editor’s note at the top of the article on Dec. 5, 2014, stating that Rolling Stone’s trust in the article’s primary source had been misplaced. After a review by the Columbia Journalism School found that the article was a “journalistic failure that was avoidable,” Rolling Stone officially retracted the piece in April 2015.

Eramo’s suit went to trial in October, at which time she argued that she’d been painted as the “chief villain” in Erdely’s debunked tale. At the time of the article’s publication, Eramo had been the associate dean charged with aiding student survivors of sexual assault; mentioned more than 30 times in the piece, Eramo claimed she had been portrayed as callous and indifferent to students’ needs, and that she’s since suffered unduly at the hands of Erdely and her editors.

After three weeks at trial, jurors found in favor of Eramo, saying in their verdict that Erdely had acted with actual malice in publishing certain false statements about Eramo, and that the magazine had acted with equal malice in “republishing” the article with the editor’s note on Dec. 5. They awarded Eramo $3 million, although she had sought $7.85 million when the suit was filed.

This past Dec. 5, two years after the fateful editor’s note was tacked onto the online story, Rolling Stone filed a motion with the court to overrule the jury’s verdict. The motion states that there is no evidence to support the jury’s findings that the defamatory statements were republished, and that Eramo did not successfully prove that Erdely published the statements with actual malice.

While neither Eramo nor a federal judge has responded to the magazine’s motion, a judge has temporarily suspended the enforcement of the jury’s verdict until the matter is settled.

In its own filing, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press said that it and eight other news organizations support Rolling Stone’s motion “with respect to the question of whether the editor’s note constituted a ‘republication’ of the entire article,” and that they wish to assist the court in its determination of the case.

In the filing, the organizations say they are reputable news organizations and that each of which “recognizes a commitment to be vigilant in clarifying inconsistencies and to update their work accordingly” in the hopes of providing their audience with accurate information. In that capacity, the organizations wish to “stress the chilling effects” that would result if Rolling Stone was to be penalized for the “republishing” element of the jury’s verdict.

“Plaintiff threatens to set a dangerous precedent for news organizations and those who rely upon them for accurate up-to-the-minute news throughout the country,” the filing reads. “Upholding the current verdict would set [the organizations] on a collision course between correcting errors in their journalism and facing liability for doing so.”

A federal judge has yet to publicly weigh in on the recent spate of filings, other than to stall the verdict’s enforcement.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.nbc29.com/story/34035841/judge-journalist-group-can-file-documents-in-rs-defamation-appeal


Judge: Journalist Group can File Documents in RS Defamation Appeal
Posted: Dec 12, 2016 9:49 PM CST
Updated: Dec 12, 2016 9:52 PM CST

File Image
File Image
CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. (WVIR) -

A group of journalists wants its voice heard on the final outcome of the Rolling Stone defamation trial.

Monday, a federal judge ruled the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press can file legal documents to help Rolling Stone attempt to overturn the jury's verdict.

Last month, a jury ruled Rolling Stone and others defamed University of Virginia administrator Nicole Eramo and awarded $3 million.

The media group has an issue with the jury's ruling that a Dec. 5 editor's note constituted a republication of the now-retracted article about a gang rape at UVA.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

All this...but "Jackie" remains anonymous and unscathed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.newsplex.com/content/news/Hearing-set-for-Rolling-Stone-appeal-in-defamation-suit-408164925.html

Hearing set for Rolling Stone appeal in defamation suit

By Tomas Harmon |
Posted: Sat 3:20 PM, Dec 24, 2016 |
Updated: Sat 6:44 PM, Dec 24, 2016

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. (NEWSPLEX) -- A hearing has been set for the Rolling Stone appeal in Roanoke Federal court in the new year.

Rolling Stone is asking a judge throw-out the jury's finding in a defamation case over the magazine's now defunct "A Rape on Campus."

In November 2016, a jury sided with former UVA Dean Nicole Eramo and awarded her $3 million.

The Jan. 9 hearing will address a motion filed by Rolling Stone's attorneys that argues there is no evidence writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely acted with actual malice.

The motion also challenges the jury's finding that Rolling Stone "republished" the article in December 2014 when it added an editor's note to the online version acknowledging there were problems with the article.

Several prominent news outlets have sided with Rolling Stone, arguing the editor's not does not constitute a republication.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.theindianalawyer.com/uva-administrator-urges-judge-to-keep-rolling-stone-verdict/PARAMS/article/42396


UVa administrator urges judge to keep Rolling Stone verdict
Associated PressDecember 28, 2016

Attorneys for a University of Virginia administrator are urging a federal judge not to overturn a jury's verdict against Rolling Stone magazine for its botched story "A Rape on Campus."

Lawyers for Nicole Eramo say in court documents filed Tuesday that the jury was correct when it found that Rolling Stone and reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely defamed Eramo with their 2014 story.

The jury awarded Eramo $3 million in November.

Rolling Stone wants the judge to overrule the jury's verdict. The magazine argues, among other things, there's no evidence that writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely acted with actual malice.

Eramo's attorneys say the jury heard plenty of evidence that Erdely acted with actual malice. They argue that Erdely had a preconceived story line and harbored "ill will or bias" toward Eramo.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
A hearing has been set for the Rolling Stone appeal in Roanoke Federal court in the new year.


Given how little confidence I now have in federal courts to rule against the establishment (of which I consider
media -- which includes Rolling Stone -- to be a part), I am not expecting much other than a rollback
of the judgement against it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.cavalierdaily.com/article/2017/01/eramos-attorneys-ask-judge-to-uphold-jury-verdict

Eramo’s attorneys ask judge to uphold jury verdict
Rolling Stone, Sabrina Erdely previously found liable for defamation
by Kate Bellows | Jan 02 2017

Lawyers for former University Assoc. Dean Nicole Eramo are asking a federal judge to uphold a jury’s verdict that found Rolling Stone magazine, parent company Wenner Media, Inc. and writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely liable of defamation in connection with the now-debunked article, “A Rape on Campus.”

In November, a federal jury awarded Eramo $3 million in damages and also found the attachment of an editor’s note to the article Dec. 5, 2014 — a note that questioned the veracity of Jackie’s story — constituted a republication of the article.

Rolling Stone’s attorneys filed a motion Dec. 5 for Judge Glen Conrad to overturn the jury’s verdict, and Conrad suspended enforcement of the $3 million judgment Dec. 6 until the motion is ruled on.

Eramo’s lawyers filed their response to Rolling Stone’s motion Dec. 27.

In the opposition, Eramo’s attorneys contended the jury reasonably found the defendants republished “A Rape on Campus” when they reprinted the article with an editor’s note. Additionally, Eramo’s attorneys asserted the defendants’ statements are actionable, meaning they can be subject to legal action.

Eramo’s attorneys also argued they provided “more than sufficient evidence of harm and damages from the post-article statements” and of actual malice — defined as a blatant disregard for the truth — in Erdely’s statements.

The jury considered statements from Erdely that appeared both in the article itself and post-publication interviews.

“Ms. Eramo presented overwhelming proof of every category of actual malice evidence the jury was entitled to consider,” Eramo’s lawyers said in court documents. “[This includes] evidence that Erdely had a preconceived storyline, had obvious reasons to doubt her source’s credibility, failed to investigate in the face of inconsistencies, purposefully avoided the truth, failed to interview obvious witnesses and was aware of contradictory information.”

On the other hand, the defense’s motion for judgment contended Rolling Stone and Wenner Media had not re-published their article, arguing that there was no evidence they “affirmatively reiterated” their defamatory statements or intended to reach a new audience by adding the note.

“The jury verdict acts as a million-dollar penalty against a publisher that sought to promptly put readers on notice of serious concerns with an article and, as such, violates basic public policy,” the defense team’s lawyers said.

However, Eramo’s attorneys argued the Editor’s Note reiterated the damaging statements against their client.

“Defendants went out of their way in the Editor’s Note to bolster the portions of the article not specifically dealing with Jackie’s alleged assault, and in particular the criticisms of Dean Eramo’s response to Jackie’s rape,” Eramo’s attorneys wrote.

The defense also argued Eramo did not provide sufficient evidence of damage or actual malice on Erdely’s part, and the statements considered by the jury were not actionable.

“The record does not contain sufficient evidence for any rational jury to find by clear and convincing evidence that Erdely made any of the challenged statements knowing they were false or subjectively entertaining serious doubts as to their accuracy,” court documents said.

In addition to the defense’s motion for judgment, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and eight media companies filed an amicus (“friend of the court”) brief in support of the defendants’ motion for judgment.

“The Court’s decision to have the jury determine whether the defamatory information was ‘republished’ when an editor’s note was attached would be harmful for news organizations and those who rely upon them for accurate news reports,” the brief stated. “Upholding the current verdict would discourage the news media from correcting errors in their stories, particularly because not mentioning a particular fact from a story in the note constitutes ‘republishing’ it.”

Gregg Leslie, legal defense director for the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said that after the group decided to write to the court on the issue of republication, they asked several different media organizations to join them.

“The Reporters Committee filed a brief now because there was a clear issue before the court, concerning what it allowed the jury to decide,” Leslie said in an email statement. “[That is] whether posting an editor's note to a story constitutes a ‘republication’ of the article.”

Lawyers for Eramo and Rolling Stone did not respond to a request for comment.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.newsplex.com/content/news/Sullivan-announces-leaving-UVA-in-2018-411352995.html

Sullivan announces stepping down in 2018
By News Staff |
Posted: Fri 3:20 PM, Jan 20, 2017 |
Updated: Fri 6:47 PM, Jan 20, 2017

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. (NEWSPLEX) -- University of Virginia President Teresa Sullivan says she will step down when her contract runs out in the summer of 2018.

She sent a letter to the UVA community on Friday making her announcement.

"As 2017 begins, UVA is strong and positioned for even greater strength in our educational offerings, research programs, and health system," wrote Sullivan. "Given this strength, UVA is well-positioned for a transition to its ninth president."

Rector Williams H. Goodwin praised Sullivan for her years of service to UVA.

“Terry Sullivan is one of the hardest-working university presidents in the country, and her steadfast commitment to serving UVA, its students, faculty, staff, alumni and supporters is truly remarkable,” Goodwin said. “During her tenure as president, Terry has devoted herself to continue a tradition of excellence that has established the University of Virginia as a nationally preeminent public research institution of higher education. On behalf of the Board of Visitors, I wish to thank her and Doug for their service to the University community and to the commonwealth, and recognize her strong record of accomplishments as the University’s eighth president.”

The UVA Board of Visitors will appoint a presidential search committee that will seek Sullivan's replacement. Details of this committee will be released in the near future, according to a release.

Sullivan is credited with several initiatives she instituted at UVA, including the Cornerstone Plan, launching the Data Science Institute and the Brain Institute, and the Bicentennial Commission.

She also led a fundraising campaign that brought in $3 billion in her first few years, oversaw the renovation of the Rotunda, and reorganized the UVA Health System.

Sullivan's time has also been marked with scandals, including the UVA Board of Visitors trying to force her out of office in 2012. She was reinstated after student protests.

She also oversaw the university's response to the disappearance and murder of Hannah Graham and the publication of a now-defunct Rolling Stone article about an alleged gang rape at a fraternity house.

According to a release, she will be named University Professor and president emerita at the conclusion of her service. After taking a research leave, Sullivan will join the teaching faculty.

She was the first female president of UVA, appointed in 2010.

Scroll down to read all of Sullivan's letter:

To the members of the University Community:

Since my election as president in January 2010, Doug and I have cherished our opportunity to serve at the University of Virginia. UVA’s distinguished faculty, dedicated staff, and accomplished students demonstrate their capacity for achievement daily through their scholarship, discoveries, creative work, and the numerous awards and accolades that they regularly collect. As 2017 begins, UVA is strong and positioned for even greater strength in our educational offerings, research programs, and health system.

Given this strength, UVA is well-positioned for a transition to its ninth president. Because my current contract ends in summer 2018, I have asked the Board of Visitors to prepare for a presidential search. The most effective search will include the viewpoints of UVA’s many stakeholders: the Board itself; faculty, students, and staff; deans and vice presidents; alumni, parents, and philanthropists, including supporters of UVA athletics; members of the local community; and elected leaders in Richmond and in Washington. The search committee should solicit the views of our affiliated foundations, which mobilize so many dedicated volunteers for the University. Such consultation is best done without an undue sense of urgency.

An ideal transition would provide sufficient time after my successor is named for me to provide personal introductions to the Governor, key members of the General Assembly and the Governor’s Cabinet, Virginia’s congressional delegation, and alumni leaders and donors who support the University in Virginia, across the nation, and around the world. If the new president comes from outside the University, that person will also need to meet leaders on Grounds. A smooth transition takes some months to accomplish, and if we plan for that transition now, my successor will be in place and well prepared for the Bicentennial of the University’s charter in 2019 and for the launch of the Campaign for the University’s Third Century.

Many people deserve credit for UVA’s current position of strength. The University has flourished upon the foundation built by my predecessor, John T. Casteen III, and others who preceded him in the presidency. The College and every school at UVA have made notable strides in excellence, while UVA’s College at Wise remains a beacon of hope and prosperity in a region with long-term economic problems.

Because of the efforts of many people, the Cornerstone Plan has focused and aligned our collective work as a University community. We are addressing generational turnover by hiring talented faculty from diverse backgrounds to work with an energetic, committed leadership team. Other Cornerstone Plan projects include the Total Advising program, a much-enhanced UVA Career Center, the Meriwether Lewis Institute for Citizen Leadership, growth in research and related infrastructure, new commitments to affordability and access, improved operational efficiency, and expanded global programs, including the new UVA China Office in Shanghai. Our long-term financial plan emphasizes prudence and durability. We are budgeting in a new way to encourage deans to collaborate in joint hiring, combined degree programs, and new institutes and degree programs. Results of these efforts include the Data Science Institute, Brain Institute, Contemplative Sciences Center, majors in Youth and Social Innovation and in Global Studies, and the minor in Entrepreneurship. In 2016, through the new Strategic Investment Fund, we began investing in transformative projects to further distinguish the University.

Our hospital is ranked #1 in Virginia because our health care professionals commit themselves every day to providing the best, safest treatment for every patient. These professionals have worked tirelessly to improve our clinical outcomes, even as UVA disproportionately receives and treats patients with difficult, multiple diagnoses. Our team has embraced the goal of being the safest hospital in America, while our researchers bring new hope to patients through discoveries, new therapies, and cures.

Our initiatives ensure UVA’s quality and competitiveness for the future, and they are also critical for the Commonwealth of Virginia’s future. Every part of the Commonwealth benefits from UVA. UVA direct employment and its indirect effects account for 52,000 jobs. Put another way, 1 in every 76 jobs in Virginia can be traced back to UVA employment. In addition, our alumni have founded enterprises that together hire another 371,000 people in Virginia. Even while focusing on our impact at home, we have extended UVA’s global reach to expand horizons for students and faculty alike, including international research collaborations such as our recent partnership with Germany’s Max Planck Society.

We have sustained UVA’s academic excellence in spite of fiscal challenges. The combined revenue from state general funds plus tuition that the University received for each in-state student in 2016 is about $200 less than it was in 2000 (in constant dollars). This total is composed of a long-term declining contribution from the state, and a corresponding shift to tuition. That we continue to provide a first-rate education with flat revenues per in-state student results from heroic cost-containment efforts by our staff in operational areas, and our successful advancement efforts.

Despite the financial headwinds of the Great Recession, the University completed its $3 billion capital campaign in 2013, and UVA’s annual philanthropic cash flow increased from $203.8 million in 2010 to $260.2 million in 2016. Our generous donors provide the margin of excellence for UVA.

Such efforts undergird UVA’s quality and competitiveness for the future, and they provide a strong, stable foundation for a successful transition to UVA’s next leader. The University’s AAA bond rating indicates our strong financial position, bolstered by the strong investment performance of UVIMCO.

Some important tasks need to be completed so that my successor begins with a clean slate, and several initiatives demand close attention in the immediate future. The successful Rotunda restoration only begins the preparation for our Bicentennial, and the President’s Commission on Slavery and the University needs to complete its important work. Our students have wonderful new academic spaces in Nau, Gibson, Rice, Bavaro, and Lacy Halls, and renovated spaces in Ruffner and New Cabell Halls, but our STEM programs still require renovated laboratory spaces in the Chemistry Building and Gilmer Hall. The Bicentennial Scholars program, catalyzed by the Strategic Investment Fund, will ensure access to UVA for generations of future students if we give it the necessary sustained attention now. Our newly announced partnership with Inova Health System, with its associated research initiatives, also requires careful attention.

This is not a farewell note. We have unfinished business to do in the months ahead, and with your continued effort and sustained energy we will do that work together. I will be working at full speed for UVA until the very last day of my time in office. Part of that work will be to plan a successful leadership transition. Another part of the work – of my work – will be to express my deep gratitude to the members of this community who have made my service as UVA’s president both highly productive and immensely enjoyable. There will be time in the coming semesters for Doug and me to thank you and to celebrate your many contributions to UVA. In the meantime, let’s continue to work hard.

With heartfelt gratitude for the honor of serving you,

Teresa A. Sullivan
President
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.newsplex.com/content/news/Eramo-attorneys-spend-more-than-144000-on-Rolling-Stone-Lawsuit-411472145.html

Eramo attorneys spend more than $144,000 on Rolling Stone Lawsuit
By Tomas Harmon |
Posted: Sun 7:03 PM, Jan 22, 2017 |
Updated: Sun 10:52 PM, Jan 22, 2017

CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. (NEWSPLEX) -- As is standard practice following a lawsuit, attorneys for Former UVA Dean Nicole Eramo filed their Bill of Costs in federal court.

A Bill of Costs itemizes the legal team expenses during the case, and is submitted because those fees are generally paid for by the losing party.

According to the Bill of Costs, Eramo's legal team spent $144,673.11 on the Rolling Stone Lawsuit.

Costs ranged from clerk fees to printing fees and went from just $20 to over $90,000.

Eramo's legal team spent $90,377,69 on fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts used in the case and trial.

The trial invoice from the court reporter alone was $20,466.88 and the most expensive transcript was "Jackie's" at $6,003.57.

"Jackie's" fees also included a vide of her deposition.

Attorneys also spent $33,577.25 on printing, $16,497.50 on copies and $1,513.67 on witnesses.

The most expensive witness for Eramo's team was Brian Head, with over $800 spent on hotel and airfare.

Head was president of the UVA sexual assault advocacy group "1 in 4" and quoted in the retraced Rolling Stone article.

In Nov. 2016, a jury awarded Eramo $3 million saying she was defamed by Rolling Stone Magazine in the article "A Rape on Campus."

Rolling Stone has appealed the ruling, which heads before a judge in February.

If the judge upholds the jury's verdict, Rolling Stone Magazine will have to pay Eramo the $3 million and likely pay for the Bill of Costs submitted by Eramo's attorneys.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.chronicle.com/article/After-a-Tumultuous-7-Years/238977

After a Tumultuous 7 Years, Teresa Sullivan Will Leave UVa
By Jack Stripling, Katherine Mangan, and Brock Read January 23, 2017

Teresa A. Sullivan has led the U. of Virginia since 2010. During her seven years in office, many of the university’s challenges have played out on a national stage, serving as a microcosm of those facing institutions nationwide.
Teresa A. Sullivan’s announcement Friday that she will step down as leader of the University of Virginia brings to a denouement one of higher education’s most turbulent and closely-watched presidencies.

Ms. Sullivan has been in office for seven years, and her tenure can be read as a laundry list of the sternest challenges buffeting college leaders during that time — the push to embrace online courses, the increasingly corporate mind-set of boards, concerns over the racial climate on and around campuses, and the fight over how best to prevent campus sexual assault.

In a written statement asking the university’s governing board to start the process of determining her successor, Ms. Sullivan did not provide a precise reason for her pending departure, but she noted that her current contract expires in 2018. A spokesman for the university did not respond to an email late Friday seeking more information about the reasons for her departure, and the rector of the Board of Visitors declined an interview request.

A bumpy ride like Ms. Sullivan's at UVa is 'par for the course' at major universities, says Mark G. Yudof. 'I don't know whether her ride was rougher than anyone else's.'
The university is "strong and positioned for even greater strength in our educational offerings, research programs, and health system," she wrote. "Given this strength, UVa is well-positioned for a transition to its ninth president."

In the summer of 2012 it seemed unlikely that Ms. Sullivan, UVa’s first female president, would be in position to write such a note more than four years later. She abruptly resigned that June, citing a "philosophical difference of opinion" with the university’s Board of Visitors, whose rector, Helen E. Dragas, had led a campaign to oust her. Two tumultuous weeks later, after faculty, students, and alumni rallied to Ms. Sullivan’s defense, the board took the unusual step of reinstating her as president.

Her removal and comeback captured national attention beyond the realm of academe, mostly because of UVa’s prestige and history. But college professors, administrators, and governance experts paid particularly close attention to the president’s unceremonious ouster, which functioned as a cautionary tale of board overreach.

In a scathing report, an investigative panel of the American Association of University Professors said that the board’s actions demonstrated a "failure of judgment and, alas, of common sense." The full board never met to vote on Ms. Sullivan’s forced resignation, and its leaders gave precious few details about their rationale for wanting a popular president gone.

Larry G. Gerber, who was chairman of the AAUP’s Committee on College and University Governance at the time of the report, said that the Virginia case highlights the folly of boards acting without consideration for bedrock principles of shared governance.

"The final authority is in the board; that’s indisputable," Mr. Gerber said. "But the board is not supposed to act unilaterally without appropriate input, especially from faculty and other constituencies."

What was most astonishing about Ms. Sullivan’s ordeal was how it ended. Longtime observers of higher education say that they are hard-pressed to recall an occasion when a board reversed a presidential ouster, as happened at UVa.
‘Action’ vs. ‘Incrementalism’

At the heart of Ms. Sullivan’s dispute with the board’s leadership was a disagreement about the necessary pace of change at Virginia. Ms. Dragas, the architect of the failed coup, positioned herself as a change agent who had grown impatient with Ms. Sullivan’s cautious and methodical approach. (Ms. Dragas left the governing board in 2016.)

Like many board members throughout the country at the time, Ms. Dragas was intrigued by the promise of massive open online courses, or MOOCs, and fearful of Virginia being left behind as other prestigious institutions moved to embrace the courses. But Ms. Sullivan took the long view, proudly wearing the badge of an "incrementalist."

"Sweeping action may be gratifying and may create the aura of strong leadership," the president said at the time, "but its unintended consequences may lead to costs that are too high to bear."

Related Content

What It Took to Resolve a Federal Sexual-Assault Investigation at UVa Premium
Tradition in the Cross Hairs as Rape Allegations Rock UVa
UVa's Painfully Public Lesson in Leadership Premium

The faceoff between the rector and president played out in Shakespearean fashion, pitting an old-school academic against a business-minded board leader. As pure drama, it was fascinating to watch. But it functioned also as a leadership seminar, highlighting the challenges that both presidents and boards face in adapting to a more-competitive and faster-paced higher-education landscape.

Mark G. Yudof, president emeritus of the University of California system, said that Ms. Sullivan appeared to strike a balance in promoting innovation while preserving the core of a prestigious public institution.

"There is always someone who comes in and says, I know business and the future is MOOCs or this or that, and they jump on a bandwagon," said Mr. Yudof, who was chancellor of the University of Texas system when Ms. Sullivan was executive vice chancellor for academic affairs there. "The job of president is to stand up and say, This may be a fad. Let’s try some things and see how they work and not take a distinguished institution like Virginia and overnight turn it inside out and make it like a corporation."

There is a difference, Mr. Yudof continued, between modernizing a university and swiftly changing its fundamental character.

"If you have a vacuum-tube department" — one that is far behind the times, that is — "you need to do something about it," he said. "But to have a whole new ethos doesn’t work for a university."

Mr. Yudof, who endured his own share of criticism during his years in office at California, said that Ms. Sullivan’s turbulent tenure mirrors those of many college presidents today.

"It’s par for the course for major universities around the country. I don’t know if it’s worse at the University of Virginia," he said. "I don’t know whether her ride was rougher than anyone else’s."

"We have campuses which are lively and they’re big," he continued, "and anything that can happen, unfortunately, will happen."
Campus-Safety Challenges

Mr. Yudof’s observation held true at UVa, where a series of student-safety incidents repeatedly put the institution in the national spotlight. Fortune magazine referred to Ms. Sullivan as "the unluckiest president in America" in 2015, after a year in which a second-year student disappeared and was eventually found murdered, a black student was bloodied by white alcohol-enforcement agents in an off-campus arrest, and Rolling Stone magazine published a now-infamous and discredited article about a gang rape at a fraternity on campus.

The Rolling Stone article, which was later retracted, was another crisis point for UVa — and for Ms. Sullivan. After taking heat for her initial reluctance to show strong emotion about what some students were calling a "rape culture" on campus, the president suspended all social activities at fraternities and sororities. That prompted critics, including national fraternity groups and conservative commentators, to complain that she had overreacted without having all the facts.

Others said she didn’t go far enough. John D. Foubert, a rape-prevention advocate and professor of higher education and student affairs at Oklahoma State University, called the suspension "woefully inadequate," coming at the end of the semester, and "merely a PR move."

“One critical legacy from her tenure will be that modern college presidents must have great dexterity in managing narratives.”
Ms. Sullivan lifted the suspensions a few months later, after the Greek organizations agreed to a set of conditions, including that at least three people be "sober and lucid" at all parties.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights made UVa one of the initial 55 colleges under investigation for its handling of reports of sexual violence in a wave of federal enforcement actions announced in 2014.

A settlement between the agency and the university was announced in September 2015. Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act showed intense wrangling in the run-up to the agreement, as university officials steadily lobbied the department to soften findings that UVa had a sexually hostile environment. Ms. Sullivan pleaded for the agency to break protocol by sharing its letter of findings with campus officials before an agreement was reached; she eventually won significant revisions to those findings. (The Office for Civil Rights opened a second investigation of claims of sexual violence at the university this summer.)

Ms. Sullivan had "one of the most challenging and controversy-filled presidencies in recent memory," said Peter F. Lake, director of the Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy at Stetson University.

"I think one critical legacy from her tenure will be that modern college presidents must have great dexterity in managing narratives, and responses to narratives, alongside leading actual responses to critical incidents," he wrote in an email.

"The court of public opinion is impatient — and sometimes distorted in its perceptions — placing a pressure on modern presidents to act, act quickly, and act in response to narratives even if those narratives are more compelling than verifiable."

Being cautious to avoid making the wrong decision can turn out to be just as harmful as taking bold action, Mr. Lake added.

In departing, Ms. Sullivan appears once again to be taking an incrementalist approach. "A smooth transition takes some months to accomplish," she wrote in the announcement of her pending departure, "and if we plan for that transition now, my successor will be in place and well prepared for the Bicentennial of the University’s charter in 2019."

Given the demands of the job — and the often-harsh national spotlight that has shone on UVa — allowing the board ample time to name her successor is the right idea, Mr. Lake said.

Goldie Blumenstyk contributed to this report.

Jack Stripling covers college leadership, particularly presidents and governing boards. Follow him on Twitter @jackstripling, or email him at jack.stripling@chronicle.com.

Katherine Mangan writes about community colleges, completion efforts, and job training, as well as other topics in daily news. Follow her on Twitter @KatherineMangan, or email her at katherine.mangan@chronicle.com.

Brock Read is assistant managing editor for daily news at The Chronicle. He directs a team of editors and reporters who cover policy, research, labor, and academic trends, among other things. Follow him on Twitter @bhread, or drop him a line at brock.read@chronicle.com.

Goldie Blumenstyk writes about the intersection of business and higher education. Check out www.goldieblumenstyk.com for information on her new book about the higher-education crisis; follow her on Twitter @GoldieStandard; or email her at goldie@chronicle.com.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
abb
Member Avatar

http://www.nbc29.com/story/34328093/attorneys-for-nicole-eramo-release-first-reports-of-trial-cost

Attorneys for Nicole Eramo Release First Reports of Trial Cost
Posted: Jan 23, 2017 10:27 PM CST
Updated: Jan 23, 2017 10:44 PM CST

The first bill has been released for a University of Virginia administrator's costs to put on a multi-week trial against Rolling Stone Magazine.

Attorneys for Nicole Eramo say it cost them more than $144,000. This does not include lawyer fees.

Jurors found in November that the magazine, its publisher Wenner Media, and author Sabrina Rubin Erdely defamed UVA administrator Eramo with its botched story "A Rape on Campus."

The plaintiff claimed Erdely's article unfairly portrayed Eramo as a villain, indifferent to UVA student "Jackie's" allegation that she was gang raped at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house in September 2012.

Eramo was initially seeking $7.5 million in damages, but the jury chose to instead award her $3 million.

The bill of costs covers everything from filing fees, copy costs, and fees connected to having witnesses testify for the civil case. The bill was submitted to the federal court system last week.

https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wvir/documents/rolling-stone-trial-costs.pdf
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply