This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
Wrongful Termination
Disability Discrimination

Michael T. Klaric v. Vanadium-Pacific Steel Co., Richard P. Stemmler

Published: Oct. 26, 1996 | Result Date: Sep. 20, 1996 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: BC106432 –  $410,000

Judge

Sherman W. Smith

Court

L.A. Superior Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Richard A. Love
(Love LLP)


Defendant

Richard J. Stall Jr.

Cynthia C. Lam


Experts

Plaintiff

C. Dale Gosaynie
(medical)

Defendant

Wifredo M. Tupas
(medical)

Facts

In 1987, plaintiff Michael T. Klaric, a 55-year-old sales manager, underwent triple bypass surgery due to arteriosclerosis. In October 1992, the plaintiff was hired by defendant Vasco-Pacific, a steel company, as its general sales manager with a salary of $60,000 per year. Vasco-Pacific is a wholly-owned division of defendant Vanadium-Pacific Steel Company ("Vanadium-Pacific"). Defendant R.P. Stemmler is the founder, president, CEO and majority stockholder of Vanadium-Pacific. From the time he began to work, the plaintiff claimed he consistently increased overall sales and profits, served existing customers well, solicited new customers, and doubled the volume of sales. The defendants required the plaintiff to undergo a physical examination in February 1993, for which the plaintiff produced his prior medical records for the defendants' examining physician. A March 1, 1993 doctor's report noted the plaintiff's pre-existing heart condition and prior surgery, but stated that the plaintiff was in good health and that the condition did not restrict the plaintiff's physical activities, nor interfere in any way with his ability to perform his work duties. On June 14, 1993, the defendants fired the plaintiff, claiming that the termination was "for the good of the company." The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants based on wrongful termination, physical disability discrimination and harassment theories of recovery.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff made a settlement demand of $250,000 before closing argument. The defendant made a settlement offer of $25,000 on the first day of trial at the suggestion of the court.

Specials in Evidence

$___________ $190,000 $240,000 (per plaintiff) or $600,000 (per defendant $60,000 per year for 10 years) $___________

Damages

Per the defendant, the plaintiff claimed $790,000 in economic damages and $100,000 in non-economic damages.

Injuries

The plaintiff alleged he suffered depression and a severe angina attack, requiring quintuple bypass surgery and leaving him permanently disabled.

Other Information

The verdict was reached approximately two years and four months after the case was filed. The case had previously been tried in January 1996 and resulted in a hung jury (6-6) on the discrimination (physical disability) claim. This issue will be retried before Judge Sherman Smith with no jury.

Deliberation

2-4 days

Poll

12-0 (wrongful termination in violation of public policy)

Length

5 days


#119435

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390