The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

University wins Smith suit

A federal jury decided Friday to dismiss former University student Richard W. Smith's $1.25 million lawsuit against the University. After deliberating for over three hours, the jury found that the University Judiciary Committee did not violate Smith's constitutional rights.

Smith initiated the lawsuit after receiving a two-year suspension in May 1999 for his role in the Nov. 21, 1997 assault of then-first-year student Alexander "Sandy" Kory.

In the suit, Smith alleged that the UJC denied his constitutional rights of due process.

Smith did not appear for his original November 1998 UJC trial because he claimed that William W. Harmon, vice president for student affairs, led him to believe that it had been postponed.

"If I had known [the trial] was going on, I would have been there," Smith said.

Related Links
  • Richard Smith's Homepage
  •  

    He also claimed that the UJC was trained and supervised inadequately, specifically contending that his counsel was unprepared for the trial because the UJC prosecution had sprung a list of surprise witnesses on them only four days before the trial.

    U.S. District Court Judge Norman K. Moon previously dismissed University President John T. Casteen III and the Board of Visitors from liability in the suit. Friday's verdict also exonerated the UJC and Harmon.

    At Friday's trial, Smith said a not-guilty verdict "would be giving [the jury's] stamp of approval on what happened."

    But yesterday, Smith said, "I feel pretty good" about the verdict. "I appreciate having a jury that sat there for five days and listened to my story."

    "I don't feel like I lost anything," he said. "I still have my integrity."

    Richard Kast, General Counsel for the University, also said he was satisfied with the outcome.

    "We feel good that they [the jury] accepted our theory of the case and the evidence we presented," Kast said.

    Harmon said he too is "pleased with the verdict. I'm pleased because I think it serves as a reaffirmation of student self-governance and of the Judiciary Committee."

    UJC Chairwoman Lissa Percopo agreed that the verdict supports student self-governance.

    "The jury in this case had two decisions to make. The essential question was whether or not [Smith's] constitutional rights were violated. The underlying question was whether or not students are capable of ensuring these rights," Percopo said.

    "I take Friday's verdict to be a resounding yes," she said. "This is a tremendous statement of support from the surrounding community that our system and its foundations are supported by not only us as students, but also the community at large."

    Smith has a 30-day time period in which he can appeal the verdict. At this point, he said he is "really not sure" if he will make a motion to appeal.

    Smith said he felt that the judge was "trying to protect the University" throughout the trial. He also claimed that the General Counsel's "last line of defense" rested upon the University's identification of him as a "bad kid" who "will land on my feet because my family has money." Smith's father, Frederick W. Smith, is chairman of the parent company of Federal Express.

    Dismissing these claims as "nonsense," Kast said there was "no mention of his family's circumstances at all" during the trial. "My perception is that it was a fair trial."

    Bradley Kintz and Harrison Kerr Tigrett, the other students associated with the assault, are appealing their suspensions and are expected to go to trial this spring.

    Local Savings

    Comments

    Puzzles
    Hoos Spelling
    Latest Video

    Latest Podcast