Fourth Circuit decision upholding jury verdict

The Fourth Circuit issued a decision upholding a jury verdict in a Title VII gender discrimination/retaliation case. There's a good discussion of the direct and circumstantial evidence that justified the jury's verdict, and the district court's denial of the employer's motion for judgment. The direct evidence included the company's president saying, "I'm not going to have any lawsuits on my watch," and the manager saying that they hoped a disciplinary letter would force the employee to quit instead of going to the EEOC.

The case was from the Norfolk Division, Judge Raymond Jackson. The appellate decision is by Judge Niemeyer.

http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/dailyopinions/opinion.pdf/061282.P.pdf

 

Depaoli v. Vacation Sales, No. 06-1282 (4th Cir. June 12, 2007).

NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge:

Pamela Depaoli commenced this action against her former employer, Vacation Sales Associates, L.L.C., under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleging that she was discharged from her position as a sales manager in retaliation for filing a complaint of employment discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a). A jury returned a verdict in favor of Depaoli, awarding her $7.7 million for compensatory damages, backpay, and punitive damages. The district court, applying the statutory cap on damages, awarded Depaoli compensatory and punitive damages of $200,000; acting in equity, recalculated backpay and awarded Depaoli backpay of $208,708; and awarded her attorneys fees and costs of $239,865.38.

On appeal, we modify the awards of backpay and attorneys fees and, as so modified, affirm the judgment of the district court.

. . . Vacation Sales centers its argument on the contention that the evidence was insufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude that Vacation Sales' proffered reason for terminating Depaoli was merely a pretext for the alleged retaliation. We have little doubt, however, in concluding that the jury heard sufficient evidence to support its finding that the reason given for firing Depaoli was a pretext.

First, Cynthia McLachlin, a former Vacation Sales sales associate, testified that in March 2002, soon after Depaoli made her initial contact with the EEOC, McLachlin overheard a speaker-phone conversation between President Faulkner and Vice President Georgitsis. She testified that Faulkner said to Georgitsis, "I'm not going to have any lawsuits on my watch." After Faulkner hung up, Georgitsis shared with McLachlin a letter to Depaoli that required her to meet for supervision. McLachlin told Georgitsis that the required meeting would humiliate Depaoli who would rather quit than submit to the letter's terms, and Georgitsis responded, "That's what we are hoping she does for going to the EEOC; [Faulkner] doesn't want her here any longer." Second, Sandra Williams, a former Vacation Sales manager, testified that sometime after Depaoli was removed, Williams told Georgitsis that she contemplated filing a complaint with the EEOC because of another co-worker's actions. Georgitsis replied to Williams, "You don't want to do that. . . . You will end up like Pam Depaoli."

Third, Depaoli testified that in June 2003, upon returning from a leave of absence to discover that a position she desired had been filled, Georgitsis told her that "if [she] didn't start an investigation with the EEOC, [she] would have gotten that in-house director position."

In addition to this direct evidence of Vacation Sales' motives for removing Depaoli, the jury also heard evidence of actions Vacation Sales employees took to dampen Depaoli's Average Per Guest figures after Depaoli had contacted the EEOC in March 2003. For example, Victoria Headden, a former Vacation Sales receptionist responsible for assigning tours to sales associates, testified that in March 2003, sales managers began "cherry picking" likely purchasers out of group tours, even though those tours (and purchasers) were supposed to be handled by a different manager. Headden testified that Georgitsis told her to permit only certain managers to engage in "cherry picking," and Depaoli was not one of them. Also, Headden testified that in April 2003, Georgitsis directed her to assign unsuccessful group tours to particular sales associates, and to assign a higher proportion of those unsuccessful tours to members of Depaoli's team.

Finally, the sharp drop in Depaoli's Average Per Guest - falling from 1,228 in March 2003 to 467 in April 2003, the month after she filed her complaint with the EEOC - provided circumstantial evidence that the conduct of Vacation Sales' management did effect a drop in Depaoli's sales figures.

Alan Kabat, Esquire, Bernabei & Wachtel PLLC