Although the University maintains that it will appeal a judgement made against it in the Maureen Johnson sexual harassment case, Johnson and her attorney, Miranda Massie, still hope that an agreement can be worked out between the parties.

The University has stated its plans for appealing since April 2002, when a Washtenaw County Circuit Court jury ordered it to pay Johnson $250,000 in damages. The University also filed a motion to preserve its right to appeal earlier this week.

But Massie said if the University continues its plans to appeal the sexual harassment decision, she will renew a racial discrimination charge in the case, which was previously dropped due to insufficient evidence.

Originally filed in 1999, the case is the first in Michigan in which an institute of higher education was found liable for a claim of sexual harassment. Johnson, a student in the School of Music, alleged that then-Music Prof. Pier Calabria made several sexually harassing comments toward her.

She complained to University officials, including Music Dean Paul Boylan, but eventually left the University because she felt her complaints had been ignored.

Among the original charges was Johnson's allegation that her complaint had been ignored because she was black. But the charge was dropped because the plaintiffs could not obtain the documents that proved the allegation, Massie said. The jury never heard the complaint.

"The sexual harassment claim was the core of her case, the race discrimination claim came as a result of the sexual harassment," Massie added.

The charge was filed because Johnson believes "the University takes sexual harassment complaints more seriously when they are filed by white women," Massie said.

But she said she would rather drop that charge completely than risk an appeal in the sexual harassment decision.

"I think the victory on the sexual harassment claim was a huge step forward for women on the Ann Arbor campus and on campuses across the state, and it is extremely important to preserve that step forward," Massie said. "Our goal is to hold on to the step forward. If they are going to be appealing, then we are going to raise the issues that we have a right to appeal as well."

University spokeswoman Julie Peterson declined to comment further on the case, saying only that the University still plans to appeal.

In previous statements, Peterson said the University believes the jury's decision was made in error.

"In this particular case, we believe the University did everything it should have done, and we believe the verdict was incorrect," Peterson said.

She also had said the University did not believe appealing the decision would send a negative message to students who believe they are being sexually harassed by their professors or other University employees.

"Sexual harassment is unacceptable," Peterson said. "But we'd rather solve issues of sexual harassment before it gets to the litigation level. ... If it gets to the litigation level, that means the first avenues have not been successful."

But Massie said she still feels more harm than good will come if the University chooses to appeal the decision.

"It will send a green light to sexual harassers and a red light to victims who are thinking about coming forward. That is unacceptable on a university campus," Massie said. "The impact of Maureen's case, if the University is prepared to learn from the jury's verdict, will be to improve things for women of all races who are victims of sexual harassment."