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
Disability Discrimination
Hearing Impaired

William Lowe v. Rockwell International Corporation, Douglas Donnell, William Hembree and William Martin

Published: Mar. 2, 1996 | Result Date: Nov. 17, 1995 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: VC106867 –  $96,544

Judge

James M. Sutton Jr.

Court

L.A. Superior Norwalk


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Fredric S. Abrolat

Pamela M. Teren

Nancy L. Abrolat
(Abrolat Law PC)


Defendant

Karen Strauss

Daniel F. Fears
(Payne & Fears LLP)


Experts

Plaintiff

Martin J. Siegel
(technical)

Jason Engel
(technical)

J. Stephen Sinclair
(technical)

Michael J. Metz
(technical)

Defendant

Aram Glorig
(technical)

John Householder
(technical)

David T. Fractor Ph.D.
(technical)

Facts

The plaintiff, William Lowe, a severely hearing impaired man, worked for the defendant, Rockwell International Corporation ("Rockwell"), for eight and a half years as a technician until he was laid off on April 2, 1993. On June 22, 1993, the plaintiff was recalled to a different Rockwell facility to a job which the plaintiff alleged was substantially similar to his prior position with Rockwell. The plaintiff's original job was as a Propulsion Development Technician and the recall job was as a Laboratory Mechanic, Fluid/Mechanical System. Both the original and recall positions involved testing parts for the space shuttle and other projects to ensure that they could withstand the pressures and environment of space travel. After a medical examination, the defendant, Rockwell, denied the plaintiff's recall because of his hearing impairment. According to the defendant, the refusal to place the plaintiff in the recall position was due to safety concerns. According to the plaintiff, no effort was made to contact the plaintiff about his abilities. The plaintiff alleged that his original job was a higher level position which held more responsibility than the recall position he was denied. As a result of the defendants' motion for summary judgment, defendants, Douglas Donnell, William Hembree and William Martin were dismissed before trial. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant, Rockwell, based on disability discrimination prohibited under the Fair Employment & Housing Act.

Settlement Discussions

At the beginning of the case, the defendants, Rockwell and the three additional named defendants, made a joint $75,000 offer of judgment plus attorneys fees and costs. Per the plaintiff, the plaintiff proposed mediation but did not make a specific settlement demand. Thereafter, the parties discussed mediation but were unable to agree on the terms of mediation. Per the defendant, Rockwell, the plaintiff claimed total damages in excess of $6,400,000 but made a $1,400,000 settlement demand shortly before trial. Per the defendant, it advised the settlement conference judge one month prior to trial that the defendants would pay $150,000 to $200,000 to settle, but the settlement conference judge advised it that he could not get the plaintiff lower than $750,000. The defendant claimed no other settlement demand was made by the plaintiff.

Specials in Evidence

$12,000 (for past and future therapy costs for emotional distress [per the defendant]) $95,000 $478,869 (per plaintiff), $1,096,206 (present value [per the defendant])

Damages

The plaintiff was awarded $90,238 for loss past earnings, plus interest.

Other Information

The verdict was reached approximately one year and three months after the case was filed. Summary judgment was entered on behalf of the three individual defendants, Donnell, Hembree and Martin, and plaintiff's negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims were summarily adjudicated in favor of the defendant, Rockwell. The judge did not allow the plaintiff to argue punitive damages to the jury. Per the defendant, the plaintiff and his two law firms sought $592,000 in attorneys' fees plus a multiplier of 1.5 to 2.5 and $32,762.30 in costs. The judge awarded $35,000 in attorney's fees and $22,762.30 in recoverable costs. The plaintiff is appealing the fees award.

Deliberation

6+ hours

Poll

10-2

Length

12+ days


#78749

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

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