Hughes A. and Marilyn B. Bagley - Page 8

                                                 - 8 -                                                  

                  On May 29, 1987, petitioner filed a motion in the District Court to                   
            reinstate the award of $250,000 in actual damages and $1.5 million in punitive              
            damages which he had received from the jury on the invasion of privacy claim                
            which the District Court had set aside as duplicative of the libel award.                   
            Petitioner argued that since the judgment on the libel claim had been reversed              
            and remanded, the invasion of privacy award was no longer duplicative of the                
            libel award and, therefore, should be reinstated.  By order dated August 4,                 
            1987, the District Court denied petitioner's motion as premature, but stated                
            in the order that if petitioner decided to forgo retrial of the libel claim,                
            the court would be disposed to reinstate the two damage awards, and that                    
            petitioner also would be entitled to reinstatement of those two damage awards               
            if on retrial he failed to establish IBP's liability for libel.                             
                  A new trial was scheduled to begin with respect to petitioner's libel                 
            claim on September 28, 1987.  In August 1987, the parties were required to                  
            meet for a settlement conference with a magistrate.  Present at the conference              
            were Mr. Richard Smith (Mr. Smith), an attorney for IBP who had been retained               
            after the remand of the case by a new vice president and general counsel of                 
            IBP, Mr. Lonny Grigsby (Mr. Grigsby); the magistrate; petitioner's counsel Mr.              
            William J. Rawlings (Mr. Rawlings); and an associate of Mr. Rawlings, Mr.                   
            Michael P. Jacobs.  For a brief time, Judge McManus was present at the                      
            conference.  At the settlement conference, the parties agreed to an out-of-                 
            court settlement whereby IBP was to pay petitioner $1.5 million, and each                   
            party agreed to dismiss the suit against the other.  The settlement was agreed              
            to on behalf of IBP by Mr. Smith, Mr. Grigsby, and Mr. Robert Peterson, IBP's               
            president.                                                                                  
                  In negotiating the settlement, IBP's primary motivation was to resolve                
            the litigation for the lowest possible payment.  IBP agreed to the settlement               
            primarily to limit its monetary exposure, resolve its dispute with petitioner               







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011