Joanne H. Murphy v. MCI Worldcom Inc., David Lee, Tom Strobbe, Jon Rogers
Published: Sep. 9, 2000 | Result Date: Jun. 26, 2000 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: GIC732624 Bench Decision – $0
Judge
Court
San Diego Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
John R. Goffar
(Advantage Law Group, APC)
Defendant
Jon D. Meer
(Seyfarth Shaw LLP)
Facts
The plaintiff was employed as an account executive at MCI Direct from November 24, 1997 through July 14,
1998. All MCI account executives were required to meet the "Minimum Expectation Level" (MEL) of selling
20 telephone lines per week, and could be terminated for failing to do so.
Despite warnings regarding unsatisfactory sales performance, the plaintiff failed to meet the MEL for 16 out of
the 21 weeks she was required to do so. The plaintiff was terminated.
The plaintiff contended that her termination was wrongful; she was discriminated against based on her age and
gender; harassed; and retaliated against by three of her supervisors, defendants Tom Strobbe, Jon Rogers and
David Lee based on comments and incidents involving those defendants. The plaintiff also contended that the
MEL was not equally applied to all employees and was used as a pretext to terminate her employment.
The plaintiff further contended that MCI failed to accommodate her needs with respect to her sleep disorder,
and that she was terminated because of that condition.
The defendant contended that the plaintiff was terminated from MCI because of her repeated failure to meet the
MEL. The defendant argued that the comments and incidents cited by the plaintiff as discrimination,
harassment and retaliation did not constitute actionable conduct. The defendant further contended that MCI
allowed the plaintiff to skip morning sales meetings to accommodate her sleep disorder, and that the plaintiffÆs
real reason for missing the sales meetings was her hour-long commute.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff demanded $100,000 on April 20, 2000. The defendant made no settlement offer.
Damages
The plaintiff claimed over $100,000 for emotional distress and punitive damages. The defendant has filed a memorandum of costs for $16,928.
Other Information
The plaintiff plans to appeal based on her belief that the judge misinterpreted the McDonnell Douglas test in that the judge required the plaintiff to prove that she was satisfactorily performing her job, rather than that she was qualified to perform the position.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390