Jury and Judge Hear Sexual Harassment Survivor

By: Evan Brustein, Esq.

Sexual harassment and sexual assault are experiences that are often difficult to talk about.  Many victims suffer in silence out of fear of speaking up and not being believed.  People who commit these types of sexual offenses often rely on a power dynamic to silence the victim.  Whether the abuser is an employer, a teacher, or another person with authority or control over the victim, speaking up is a way to take back that power.  My client, Maria, was one of those women, who suffered in silence for almost a decade at the hands of her boss, until she could bear it no longer.  Too often, victims of sexual assault believe that the burden is on them to prove what happened.  While the burden of proof is technically on the plaintiff, the person bringing the case, that burden actually rests on the attorney, not the victim to prove anything.  It is challenging enough for victims to come forward and share their stories.  As a plaintiff’s attorney, I tell all my clients the same thing.  “Your job is simple, tell the truth, and we will handle the rest.” Our job is to build their case and prove it to the jury.
 
Last October, Maria finally had her day in court - actually four days in federal court.  Even though Maria had spent years thinking no one had seen the abuse she had endured, at trial, Maria was not alone.  Two eyewitnesses came forwarded and corroborated Maria’s story.  These witnesses saw how Maria’s boss had treated her, and they told the truth.  After all those years a jury finally heard Maria speak her truth.  On equal footing under the law, Maria confronted her boss, who had sexually assaulted her and she regained her power.  Ironically, no longer hidden in the shadows of her office, Maria was free to speak her truth, and instead it was her boss who sat silently saying nothing.  The jury believed Maria and found that she had suffered emotional damages in the amount of $1.725 million and that her employer needed to pay an additional $1 million in punitive damages for what he did to her.
 
While jury trials are very much about proving to the jury that the plaintiff was harmed and the extent of that damage, to successfully maintain that verdict, it is important for the trial attorney to also convince the judge.  In Maria’s case, the Defendants made a motion pursuant to F.R.C.P. Rule 50, to throw out the verdict, but Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, a United States District Court Judge in the Southern District of New York, found that the verdict was in line with other verdicts in the Second Circuit.  
 
In Vangas v. Montefiore Med. Ctr., 823 F.3d 174, 180 (2d Cir. 2016), the Second Circuit held that “the Court may set aside a jury’s verdict “where there is such a complete absence of evidence supporting the verdict that the jury’s findings could only have been the result of sheer surmise and conjecture, or there is such an overwhelming amount of evidence in favor of the movant that reasonable and fair minded [persons] could not arrive at a verdict against him.”
 
In responding to the Rule 50 motion, we focused on several factors to establish that the sexual harassment was particularly egregious.  First, that this was not an isolated incident, but that the harassment had lasted for years.  Second, that it was not just words but also multiple sexual assaults.  And finally, that the emotional harm suffered by Maria had continued through trial with no end in sight. 
 
In his February 27, 2024 Order Denying Defendants’ Post Trial Motions, and Granting Plaintiff’s Fees Motion, Judge Hellerstein wrote, “Plaintiff’s credibility was untouched by strenuous cross-examination.”  Judge Hellerstein further found that “Physical injuries heal; emotional injuries can mar a life without surcease.  I cannot say that plaintiff’s recovery exceeded the bounds of compensation.”  After years of silence, a federal judge and a federal jury both told Maria that they heard and more importantly they believed her.  
 
Establishing trust between the attorney and the client is essential to a successful case.  When taking on these types of cases, one the greatest challenges is to make someone who has endured years of abuse and trauma feel comfortable and safe enough to speak up.  Abusers count on this silence to not just get away with it one time, but repeatedly.  Maria’s hope from this case is that her courage and success in court will lead others to speak their truth.  To someone trapped in a cycle of abuse, it may seem like they are going through this struggle alone, but it does not mean that no one is watching.  Victims need to speak their truth, let lawyers build their case and know that juries will hear them.  
 
Evan Brustein is an experienced federal civil rights trial attorney having tried over 100 cases to verdict in state and federal court and is the founding member of Brustein Law PLLC, a litigation boutique firm focused on empowering wronged employees and victims of sexual assault and police misconduct to have their voices heard.  Evan leverages his trial experience to resolve cases for his clients, early in the process, when possible, but always with an eye towards trial, if necessary.  The trial Evan discussed is Pizarro v. Euros El Tina Restaurant Lounge and Billiards Corp., et al., 20-CV-5783 (AKH) in the Southern District of New York and it was tried in October 2023.