A judge Monday gave no inkling on how — or when — she might rule in the latest round of motions in the Big City Coffee-Boise State University legal battle.

Attorneys for two current and former Boise State administrators want District Judge Cynthia Yee-Wallace to toss out a $4 million jury verdict, or start over with a new trial.

The 4-year-old case was back before Yee-Wallace Monday, barely six weeks after jurors sided with Big City owner Sarah Jo Fendley, who said she was pushed off campus because of her vocal support of law enforcement. The case — centering on First Amendment issues — has become a flashpoint in a larger debate over Boise State’s politics.

Monday’s 40-minute court hearing relitigated pieces of the three-week jury trial.

Keely Duke, the lead attorney for the university administrators, said the plaintiffs did not prove their case — that current Boise State administrator Alicia Estey and former administrator Leslie Webb terminated Fendley’s contract in 2020 over her politics, and in response to student activists who opposed Big City’s presence on campus.

“There’s simply no evidence … that would support the verdict.”

Michael Roe, Fendley’s lead attorney, said the case still boils down to credibility. Jurors listened to Boise State’s case — including testimony from President Marlene Tromp — and didn’t buy it. “The jury believed our witnesses.”

The two legal teams sparred over pieces of the $4 million verdict:

• Duke labeled the $1 million award for economic damages as excessive. Fendley’s attorneys pegged her losses at about $700,000 — from future earnings and from a loan to open the Boise State location. “(Jurors) just came up with a damage number,” Duke said. Kersti Kennedy, an attorney for Fendley, conceded this award was “a bit of a weird decision.” However, she said, jurors could have simply decided that the forecasts of future earnings were too conservative.
• Duke criticized the $1 million punitive damages against Webb, saying there was no evidence that she did, or would, retaliate against Fendley over her politics. Kennedy suggested that jurors saw Webb differently: “deferential” toward the activists who opposed Big City, but indifferent toward Fendley. “She just had a much greater involvement in this case than Estey did,” Kennedy said.

Duke is pushing for a pair of motions. If Yee-Wallace doesn’t set aside the jury verdict — essentially ruling in favor of Estey and Webb — Duke wants a new trial. In either case, she said, the First Amendment complaint is unfounded, and the damage awards were excessive.

Kennedy dismissed the idea of a do-over.

“I question whether anyone in this room really wants to try this case again.”

If Yee-Wallace lets the jury verdict stand, Duke could also appeal the case to the Idaho Supreme Court.

Regardless, the two sides will be back before Yee-Wallace on Jan. 6. At that time, she will consider another group of motions — including Roe’s request for $1.7 million in legal fees and costs.