IBJNews

  • Home

Former Star columnist’s lawsuit set for trial

IBJ Staff
January 6, 2012
Keywords
Indianapolis Star, Law, Lawsuits, Legal Issues, Media & Marketing, Newspapers, Publishing, Trial
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

An age-discrimination lawsuit brought by a former columnist for The Indianapolis Star is set to go to trial in April after a federal judge rejected the newspaper’s attempt to dismiss her complaint.

Susan G. Guyett, 63, sued the Star and its owner, Virginia-based Gannett Co., in April 2010, alleging that her age led to her dismissal in December 2008.

Guyett wrote the “Talk of Our Town” column. She charges in her suit that the content and concept of the column remained the same after it was assigned to a younger reporter.

The newspaper filed a motion to dismiss the suit, which Judge Richard L. Young denied late last month.

A jury trial is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. April 24 at the federal courthouse in downtown Indianapolis.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • young politicians
    irene whiteFebruary 13, 2013 11:59 AM
    i have never seen you report on the younger jud mcmillin. freshman legislator. what is his secret history with glass houses and rocks. a strange analogy. please let us know how to vote for the best.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • more than money
    rickJanuary 8, 2012 5:38 PM
    These things are usually about more than money. It seems almost every business wants younger employees. The Indy Star is desperate to attract younger readers, and they likely believed a younger reporter would help do that. In truth though, their audience IS older, and a move like this is likely to turn off their most loyal readers, not attract younger ones.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Age and the Workplace
      TerryJanuary 7, 2012 9:14 AM
      I hope the Star's legal team planned ahead, because this will be a trial that many employers will be watching. Rather than assign the column to a younger employee, obviously paid less than Susan, a redesign of the column's focus might have been a better move. As the economy turned downward, beginning in 2007, many companies elected to use the opportunity to release older, higher paid employees, and this type of lawsuit will be heard nationally over the next few years. They better pack the jury with young, out of work college graduates, because an elderly juror will not appreciate the release of an employee, age 63, because the bottom line needed to be improved.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Hope the jury discovers truth
      AnonymousJanuary 6, 2012 3:11 PM
      I hope that the paper did not let her go due to her age, as that would be wrong. However, I think that it was time for her to retire anyway. I felt her column was more about writing about her well-connected local friends than actually reporting on important social events in the city, i.e. if you were not in her circle, she did not cover or write about your event.
      In any case, here's hoping that the jury finds out the true facts and that whatever the appropriate justice is, it is served accordingly.
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment
    • Go Girl!!
      GgalJanuary 6, 2012 2:13 PM
      Susan did a great job reporting the local social scene. Kathy K is good but someone has to stand up for the over 40+ crowd. You go Girl!!
      Reply to CommentFlag Comment

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    ADVANCED SEARCH
    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ

    1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

    2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

    3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

    4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

    5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

    ADVERTISEMENT