Ellen Pao lost most of her gender discrimination suit again Silicon Valley VC firm Kleiner Perkins on the jury's first vote.
However, the jury voted 8-4 on the final claim of the case, that the firm retaliated against her for complaining about harassment and filing the lawsuit. Apparently, one juror changed his mind between the jury room and the time he read his decision on the stage.
The specific question that the jurors split on was:
- "Were Ms. Pao's conversations in December 2011 and/or her January 4, 2012 memorandum and/or her filing this lawsuit a substantial motivating reason for Kleiner Perkins' decision to terminate Ms. Pao's employment?"
Later, the jury came back and delivered a 9-3 "no" vote, ending the case.
The other three claims had at least nine jurors voting "no":
- "Was Ms. Pao's gender a substantial motivating reason for Kleiner Perkins' not promoting Ms. Pao to senior partner?"
- "Were Ms. Pao's conversations in December 2011 and/or her January 4, 2012 memorandum a substantial motivating reason for Kleiner Perkins' not promoting her to senior partner?"
The third claim was complicated, as jurors had to answer different sets of questions depending on how they answered the first two claims.
We've embedded the verdict form below.
Pao is seeking $16 million in lost wages, plus up to $144 million in punitive damages.
SEE ALSO: Kleiner Perkins attorney: Pao just 'wanted a huge payout for team Ellen'
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: 14 things you didn't know your iPhone headphones could do