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
Sexual Harassment
Discrimination, Retaliation

Sheri Dillon v. Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority

Published: Jul. 16, 2009 | Result Date: Apr. 19, 2009 |

Case number: BC386989 Verdict –  $976,962

Attorneys

Plaintiff

Thomas L. Hoegh


Defendant

Adam Y. Siegel
(Jackson Lewis PC)

Sherry L. Swieca
(Jackson Lewis P.C.)

Mindy S. Novick


Facts

In 1984, the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority hired Sheri Dillon, a reserve police officer for the city of Burbank. In 1991, Dillon was promoted to the rank of sergeant for the Airport Authority. As a sergeant, plaintiff supervised several officers.

In 2002, Dillon began dating Dios Marrero, who was the executive director of the Airport Authority. In 2003, Marrero sought a more intimate romantic relationship with Dillon. In 2005, Dillon suffered an injury when she fell off of her chair. The next year, Marrero and the Airport Authority, through a negotiated memorandum of understanding, cancelled all their police officers' full salary worker's compensation benefits, including Dillon's. Later, Dillon accepted a light-duty position, but was advised that because she could not return to full duty and wear appropriate and necessary equipment, she would be terminated. Plaintiff was terminated on Feb. 1, 2007.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that she was wrongfully terminated and retaliated against because she resisted Marrero's advances. The plaintiff also claimed that the Airport Authority failed to accommodate her work restrictions.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that no retaliation occurred because all decisions made regarding benefits were applicable to all police officers as a result of economic conditions. The defendant also contended that it made every effort to accommodate plaintiff but she refused the most minimal equipment requirements.

Injuries

The plaintiff claimed emotional distress.

Result

The jury awarded the plaintiff $976,962.

Other Information

FILING DATE: March 10, 2008.


#127517

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

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