‘Price Is Right’ Lawsuit Verdict Overturned

    March 14, 2013
    Sean Patterson
    Comments are off for this post.

Do pregnancy discrimination laws extend to employment that is based on a woman’s physical attributes? Brandi Cochran thinks so. Unfortunately for her, a judge believes she will have to argue her case a second time.

The Associated Press is reporting that a Los Angeles judge has found that the jury in Cochran’s discrimination trial was not properly instructed. Specifically, the judge determined that the jury should have been instructed to consider, when The Price is Right producers declined to have Cochran returning as a model, whether pregnancy discrimination was a “substantial factor.” The $8.5 million verdict awarded to her has now been wiped away and a retrial has been called for.

While performing as a model on The Price is Right, the 41-year-old Cochran became pregnant and took maternity leave. When she tried to return to the show in 2010, she was turned down by producers, who told her they needed no more models. Cochran sued for pregnancy discrimination, alleging that her pregnancy was the reason the producers to let her go.

  • RocketJL

    This is a toughy. However, to void everything because a new judge feels and old judge did not adequately brief a jury. Almost seems that juries must follow a judges instructions/orders to the letter or a verdict will no count or be legal. Wow. It is very clear that the judicial system and the courts are absolutely against the victim. If the judge is at fault, will the courts pay all the expenses of a new trial?????

  • Brent

    No doubt, it is true that women are considered with different rules in work environments, most of which can be remedied with respect for each party from the other, as well as expectations and job requirements explained very clearly.
    Knowing the the entire job at The Price Is Right” show is for the female models’ appearance, if the good looks that she was hired for are no longer present, and if the appearance of glamor has been lessened, the model would have to realize that her value, her brand, is no longer an asset to the show.
    On the other side of argument, if the producers were unrealistic and overly concerned with a minor flaw which other models were given leniency in, then the precedence has been set in favor for the fired model.
    I don’t think the Tort lawsuits are fair or realistic, and any judgement should be based on wage only, and paid not in lump sum, but over years on the expected schedule of wages if the model were to remain at work. Any more punishment is unduly harsh against the employer and unrealistic toward a fair judgement.
    Just an opinion. Whether it will be considered in this late age is yet to be seen.