Metro Charter limits on damages don't mean squat in federal district court but a lot of patience does

A reader showed he or she was not listening during 8th Grade Civics class with his response to my previous blog on Mrs. Juana Villegas (DeLaPaz) and the torture she and her newborn suffered at the hands of Nashville law enforcement authorities.

I wrote that the next step in her case would be the filing of a big-dollar lawsuit against Metro taxpayers, the mayor, sheriff and Berry Hill authorities. The reader responded that Mrs. Villegas could only collect up to several hundred thousand dollars according to limits under the Merto charter. The reader also called Mrs. Villegas a criminal, which somehow excuses what was done to her.

WRONG, a mundo, as The Fonz was fond of saying on the old sitcom Happy Days.

There is something called federal court. And Nashville has one downtown. Often, when civil rights of an individual are greviously violated, lawsuits are filed against the offenders in this court.

In this court, Metro's legal limit on damages doesn't mean squat. Federal law supersedes local law when it comes to matters of civil rights.

Mrs. Villegas can sue for actual damages and for emotional damages, also known as punitive damages. A federal jury -- that would have to include some mothers -- would hear her case. They are not bound in delivering an award of whatever size by the Metro Charter.

Now Metro can appeal any jury decision and damages awarded. And that makes such lawsuits difficult to advance, even just to get the facts of a case adjudicated let alone get damages awarded.

For instance, Metroplitan Nashville is the defendant in a lawsuit over an alleged wrongful firing in 2002 of a school district employee. The plaintiff, Vicky Crawford, claims that she was fired after participating in an internal sexual harrassment investigation of a district executive.

That case has been going on for six years now. The case is now before the U.S. Supreme Court, from which a decision is expected following the summer recess on a part of civil rights law upon which Crawford is trying to sue.

The facts of the case still have not been heard by a court. And obviously, those facts are in dispute. Metro claims no wrongdoing.

Vicky Crawford is supported in her interpretation of civil rights law that should allow her lawsuit to go forward by a prominent local law firm and the law school for the University of Washington. The Bush administration also supports her position as far as the law allowing her lawsuit to go forward -- not the facts of the case.

A favorable ruling for Crawford would return the case to the local federal district court for ajuducation of allegations. If Crawford wins on the facts, then damages would be decided. But any kind of decision on either matter could still be some time away.

So that's about how simple and complicated it is in filing a civil rights lawsuit. Anyone can sue for anything. But getting damages -- even beyond the Metro Charter limit -- requires a lot of endurance no matter how strongly one feels they have been wronged.