 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Kennedy v. City of St. Paul3/21/2000
This appeal, restricted to damages issues, is from a district court judgment finding the City of St. Paul and the director of its park- ranger program liable for violations of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). We affirm the district court's findings on past and future mental anguish and future medical expenses because they have the requisite legal and evidentiary support. But we are unable to reconcile the disallowance of lost earnings with the court's findings on retaliation and inability to work, and therefore we reverse and remand for reconsideration. We also reverse and remand for clarification on the calculation of attorneys' fees and for a correction in the assessment of costs.
FACTS
The district court conducted a trial extending from October through December 1997 on allegations that the city and the director of the park-ranger program (collectively "city") failed to take timely and appropriate action to remedy a hostile work environment and retaliated against the employees who reported MHRA violations. The hostile- environment allegations involved a male ranger's sexually offensive behavior directed at four female rangers between 1988 and 1993. The court issued more than 30 pages of findings in support of its conclusion that the "conduct was pervasive and created an extremely intimidating and highly sexualized work environment" that constituted sexual harassment under Minnesota Statutes sections 363.03, subdivision 1(2)(c); 363.01, subdivision 10a (1988).
The court expressly found that the city willfully violated the four female rangers' rights by repeatedly ignoring the conduct and failing to take timely and remedial action to stop it. The court also found that the city retaliated against two of the female rangers by ordering them to apologize and by refusing to promote them, in violation of Minnesota Statutes section 363.03, subdivision 7 (1988).
The district court found the city liable for past and future mental anguish amounting to $25,000 for ranger Rita Meyer Parks and $12,500 for ranger Kathryn Mansfield and for future medical expenses of $4,000 apiece. The court ordered $8,500 in punitive damages for each claimant, a civil penalty of $1,500, and $111,217 attorneys' fees plus costs.
Meyer Parks and Mansfield appeal, challenging (1) the district court's failure to award lost earnings to Meyer Parks; (2) the amount awarded for mental anguish and future medical expenses; (3) the calculation of attorneys' fees; and (4) the failure to allow pretrial preparation fees for an expert witness.
DECISION
On finding an unfair discriminatory practice in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, the district court may award appropriate relief, including compensatory and punitive damages, a civil penalty to be paid to the state, and attorneys' fees and costs. Minn. Stat. ยงยง 363.071, subd. 2, 363.14, subds. 2, 3 (1988). A district court's factual findings on damages allowable under the MHRA will be upheld unless the findings are clearly erroneous or without evidentiary support. Anderson v. Hunter, Keith, Marshall & Co., 417 N.W.2d 619, 628 (Minn. 1988). Damages must be proved by a fair preponderance of the evidence, but resolution of conflicting evidence is left to the district court. Canada by Landy v. McCarthy, 567 N.W.2d 496, 507-08 (Minn. 1997).
I.
Meyer Parks argues that the evidence does not support the district court's failure to award her any compensatory damages for lost wages. To be recoverable, damages must not be speculative, remote, or conjectural. Pietrzak v. Eggen, 295 N.W.2d 504, 507 (Minn. 1980); Duchene v. Wolstan, 258 N.W.2d 601, 606 (Minn. 1977). Future loss
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Minnesota Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|