The case that woke up echoes nobody at Notre Dame wanted to hear finally ended Wednesday, and the thunder could shake down the school for a long time to come.
A jury decided that Notre Dame discriminated against former offensive line coach Joe Moore because of Moore’s age when it fired him on Dec. 2, 1996. Moore was 64 at the time.
The jury also decided the discrimination was willful, meaning the firing was reckless, and the awarded back pay of $42,935.28 will be doubled to $85,870.56. Further damages, including legal fees and “front pay”–anticipated future earnings–will be determined at a hearing July 28 in South Bend.
Notre Dame has never been known to take defeat well, and Wednesday was no exception.
“I am obviously disappointed in the outcome,” stoic head coach Bob Davie said on the steps of the courthouse. “But I’m obviously relieved this is over.”
How many trials end with the losing side more relieved than upset? Yet the comment was understandable, even expected, after an ugly week for Davie and his employer. The trial painted a seamy picture of the Notre Dame football program, making it seem as though infighting and back-stabbing were commonplace.
The trial raised several questions about the program, but Davie wouldn’t answer any. Athletic Director Mike Wadsworth admitted Notre Dame didn’t come out of it looking good.
“It’s not one of our proudest moments to have all these matters before the public,” he said. “(Moore’s side) obviously did a lot of things calculated to embarrass this university.”
Most of those embarrassments were presumably put to the side when the jury began its four-hour deliberation, but another came to light with the verdict. With Davie’s word pitted against Moore’s, the jury believed Moore, not the leader of the Irish football team.
“I’m just glad that they believed me,” Moore said. “People who know me know I don’t lie.”
Technically Moore won, but presiding U.S. Judge Allen Sharp said he has his doubts. “I believe deeply that there are no winners here,” he said after reading the verdict.
It will be up to Sharp to determine any further damages at the July 28 hearing, but he did not sound inclined to make Moore a wealthy man. He also said he would not reinstate Moore to his position.
Moore had sought at least $1.3 million in a settlement, and he will probably fall well short of that. In that sense, Notre Dame can claim some kind of victory, but as former Irish coach Lou Holtz often said, “Notre Dame doesn’t have moral victories.”
Much of the testimony cast Notre Dame in a bad light. Assistant coach/recruiting coordinator Bob Chmiel was said to have been smoking cigars and drinking with one player at a party where several underage Irish players were drinking. Davie admitted questioning Holtz’s mental stability, while Moore allegedly referred to Holtz as “the little bastard in glasses.” Moore was said to have hit players on numerous occasions, and a group of players once watched loudly as a male and female cheerleader had sex.
Because of the embarrassing nature of the trial and the low damage award likely to be assessed, Notre Dame is unlikely to appeal and go through this again.
“I’m looking forward to going back to what I do best, and that’s coaching football,” Davie said.
What Davie does not do best, clearly, is testify. On several occasions, he either contradicted his own taped deposition or incriminated himself. He admitted that, after firing Moore, he told former graduate assistant Justin Hall, “Let’s face it–he’s 64 years old,” and that he mentioned Moore’s age on a couple of other occasions but couldn’t recall why.
That may have been all the eight jurors legally needed after Moore’s lawyers won a critical dispute about the jury instructions. The jurors were told they had to determine if age was a motivating factor in the firing, not necessarily the motivating factor.
Notre Dame had hoped the jury would be told to decide whether Davie would have fired Moore if Moore were considerably younger.
“The exact same thing would have happened,” Notre Dame attorney William Hoye said during his closing argument. “These guys were like oil and water.”
Reached outside a parking structure near the courthouse, six of the jurors declined to comment on any aspect of the case.
Because of the wording of the jury instructions, the jurors did not have to consider the legitimacy of Notre Dame’s other reasons for firing Moore. Athletic department officials claimed Moore was fired because he was an abusive coach who repeatedly struck players, ignored team rules and planned to retire soon.
“We did not think age was in any way a factor,” Wadsworth said. “Notre Dame has never made a practice of age discrimination, and we didn’t make a practice of age discrimination in this case. Performance was the issue.”
Wadsworth would have done anything for a question just about football. He didn’t get any, but Moore did. When asked if he would coach again, he said he’d love to if he can “get a job I enjoy.” He enjoyed his last job plenty, but Notre Dame wouldn’t let him keep it. Now he’s looking for work, and his former employer finds itself on the wrong side of the law.
As Sharp said, there are no winners here. For a school that prides itself on winning and doing things the right way, the pain of going home 0 for 2 will linger for a while.
