Freelance writer Dominic Patten is a Deadline contributor
The jury in former Desperate Housewives star Nicollette Sheridan’s wrongful termination suit announced to the court late Thursday afternoon that it is “having difficulty reaching a verdict.” After its first full day of deliberations, the 12-member jury (9 women, 3 men) came out of the jury room at 4 PM to express its concerns to Judge Elizabeth Allen White and the lawyers for Sheridan and defendants Marc Cherry and ABC. Judge White, visibly surprised by the jury’s return to the courtroom on this matter, advised that they recess slightly early, spend the evening reflecting on the matter and then reconvene tomorrow morning at 10 AM. “I’m sensing some frustration and polarization,” Sheridan’s lawyer Mark Baute said outside the courtroom afterward, “I think the majority of jurors are in Nicollette’s favor but it takes 9 to get to the finish line.” Defense lawyer Adam Levin was unavailable for comment. Because Sheridan’s case is a civil trial, it does not require a unanimous verdict from jurors, but only that 9 jurors agree on the matter before them.
Earlier in the afternoon, the jurors requested some definition from the judge and lawyers for their deliberations. Specifically, the jury wanted a definition of the term “complaint.” After some back and forth between the judge and the lawyers, the jury was brought back into the courtroom. “Although an employee need not formally file a charge in order to qualify as a complaint,” Judge White told the jurors, “the employee needs to put the employer on notice of any allegedly improper activities.” That was the definition the jury was given for the term “complaint,” and it then returned to the jury room. Sheridan, as was instructed by the ABC Studios’ policy at the time, did inform line producer George Perkins of the alleged head-hitting incident between herself and series executive producer Marc Cherry on September 24, 2008. ABC was also informed of the incident from a letter from Sheridan’s entertainment lawyer Neil Meyer. The jury is expected tor resume deliberations Friday. A hung jury would result in a mistrial in this case.


How would her lawyer have any idea which way the jurors were leaning? Wouldn’t it be illegal if he did know?
He’s probably just trying to spin the story in his favor. The best he could legally do would be to guess, and it’s not like he would tell the press that he didn’t think his client would win.
Lawyers trying to spin a story? Now that is unheard of!
That’s why he said “I think”…
Most lawyers speak out of their ass so Baute doesn’t know crap. I think they will award her something but probably in the low six figures. This thing should have been settled a long time ago.
They are leaning in Nicolette’s direction. Now that they understand what her “complaint” means in legal terms they will vote 9 to 3 in her favor.
They are honing in on the correct issue, which is the timing and substance of her complaining to ABC about the hit.
I don’t care about Marc Cherry. I don’t know why Nicollette Sheridan was fired. Was it about accident or not. But that decision should not be ruled in her favor. Simply because if will open door and then every other actor that will be killed on his show could file same chargers and say that he was killed because of some reason. And we would have boring shows where producers will be afraid to kill main characters because they can sue them later.
Looking as if it will be the 9 women for and the 3 men against her, based on what has been stated so far, as these women might be fans of this show and of hers, but in terms of a settlement, she probably won’t get a substantial award but just enough to finally bring this case to a close once and for all.
I’m pretty sure ABC would have kept superfans off the jury.
i love nicolette sheridan, she did add a lot to the show but I must say that this case puzzles me — there are a lot of people who die on this show and she completed her season, isn’t there an out clause for all actors that they can be killed off — much like the soaps do? Did they renew her contract but decide to kill her one year earlier and not pay her?
No. She is saying that she was fired BECAUSE she complained about being hit by Cherry. It’s not simply that she was fired.
Cherry lost this case the second he laid a hand on Sheridan. When a complaint of battery or sexual harassment contains actual physical touching there’s no work related rationale to justify it. The sour relationship between the two, Cherry hitting her (if ever so slightly) and then the termination leave too many question marks. Sheridan reported it, was interviewed by ABC’s HR and yet they still reached a conclusion/considered it finalized is extremely poor. She’ll win. The jury won’t. E able to justify Cherry hitting someone he admitted he had a difficult relationship with.
This case is more nail biting than Desperate Housewives has been in seasons.
Ha! So true.
Cherry should have taken his licks and paid a settlement a long time ago.
True Sheridan has not proven she was fired for complaining, but Cherry knows he hit her in front of witnesses and even begged her for forgiveness.
How did ABC let this get so far???