Charles Pennington and Willie Sims v. Clayton Industries
Published: Sep. 4, 2002 | Result Date: Jul. 26, 2002 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: CV0012266FMC Verdict – $734,383
Judge
Court
USDC Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Defendant
Jon D. Meer
(Seyfarth Shaw LLP)
Experts
Plaintiff
Brian H. Kleiner
(technical)
Franklin C. Milgrim
(medical)
Joyce Elaine Pickersgill
(technical)
Defendant
Francine B. Kulick
(medical)
Carley C. Ward
(technical)
Facts
The plaintiffs, Charles Pennington and Willie Sims, were laid off or terminated from their
employment at the defendant Clayton Industries after working there for 42 years and 35 years
respectively. Plaintiff Charles Pennington was 61 years old at the time of his termination and
plaintiff William Sims was 59 when he was terminated.
Settlement Discussions
Mediator Marc Rudy proposed a settlement which both the plaintiffs and defendant were unwilling to accept. The plaintiffs demanded $1.7 million to settle prior to trial.
Damages
Loss of wages since the plaintiffs were unable to obtain alternative employment.
Injuries
Depression.
Other Information
The Court granted a partial summary judgment for the defendant on the claims of race and disability discrimination, race and disability harassment, and retaliation. The court, however, found that there was a triable case of age discrimination. The jury found that the defendants were guilty of age discrimination in violation of state and federal law and public policy. Plaintiff Pennington was awarded $164,478 in lost wages, medical expenses and emotional distress; $140,040 in front pay, minus $35,010 for failure to mitigate, plus $87,500 in punitive damages. Plaintiff Sims was awarded $207,968 in lost wages, medical expenses and emotional distress plus $118,875 in front pay minus $31,968 for failure to mitigate, plus $87,500 in punitive damages. The plaintiffs will also be pursuing attorney fees and costs. The defendant has made a post trial motion for the judge to reconsider her award of front pay, which was decided by the judge, rather than the jury. The award of "front pay" is an amount of future damages (lost wages) after trial. The defendant contends that front pay was inappropriately awarded because the plaintiffs each testified that they were unable to work for reasons not caused by the defendant and, in any event, the jury determined hat the plaintiffs failed to mitigate their damages. The defendant will also be pursuing other post trial motions after the Court enters judgment.
Deliberation
one day
Length
three weeks
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390