Elizabeth Vaden v. Michael J. Astrue (Commissioner of the Social Security Administration)
Published: Apr. 18, 2009 | Result Date: Jan. 26, 2009 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 07CV02957(VBF) Settlement – $4,000
Court
USDC Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Leo J. Terrell
(Law Office of Leo Terrell)
Defendant
Thomas P. O'Brien
(Paul Hastings LLP)
Robyn-Mari Lyon Monteleone
(Office of the U.S. Attorney)
Facts
Plaintiff Elizabeth Vaden was terminated from her employment with the Social Security Administration (SSA) on Oct. 20, 2005 after 17 years of service. During her employment with the SSA, Vaden gave testimony to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) concerning the claim of co-worker Diane Huntsman that she had been discriminated against based on her disability and race by director Sharon Rapport.
In December 2003, Vaden was recuperating from knee surgery and, based on her doctor's recommendation, requested to telecommute from home. Plaintiff claimed Rapport denied the request citing a lack of authority, but Vaden discovered that Rapport was the sole authorization required. Vaden returned to work on restricted duty but her supervisor, Vester Levingston, allegedly ignored the restrictions and Vaden was required to carry heavy boxes.
In September 2004, Vaden was denied her choice of FlexiPlace days to work at home despite her seniority level and other junior employees were given their choice of days ahead of Vaden.
On Oct. 7, 2004, Rapport loudly berated Vaden in front of 30 fellow SSA employees during a staff meeting. On Oct. 14, 2004, Vaden claimed Levingston pressured Vaden to sign a letter of reprimand stating that it was Vaden who had loudly berated Rapport. After Vaden filed an EEOC complaint, she met with Rapport to ask for a reassignment; Rapport agreed to the request allegedly on the condition that Vaden withdraw her EEOC complaint. When Vaden refused to withdraw the complaint, she received a notice of impending termination on Aug. 12, 2005. Rapport had the sole authority to terminate Vaden.
Vaden filed suit against defendant Michael Astrue, SSA Commissioner.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Vaden contended that she was harassed and terminated based on her testimony in Huntsman's EEOC complaint against Rapport. Vaden argued that she suffered retaliation as her previous experience at SSA had been positive.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant denied any retaliation or harassment based on Vaden's protected right to testify on Huntsman's behalf.
Result
Vaden accepted a settlement in the amount of $4,000.
Other Information
FILING DATE: May 4, 2007.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390