A comprehensive and easily accessible directory of Employee Leasing Services nationwide
help small business Attract and Retain quality employees by offering quality benefits through Employee Leasing Services
Foster an environment of fellowship and free exchange of ideas among member Employee Leasing Companies

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.

Steppe v. Kmart Stores

11/18/1999

at the front door. Because Workman was a stockboy he was not restricted to a limited area of the store. Jamie testified that Workman frequently tapped her on her buttocks as he walked past her and, although she observed him frequently pat the cashiers on their buttocks, she failed to report his actions to the management. She admitted that she was unaware of whether management knew of Workman's harassing behavior but said that when he was discovered to be up front, the head cashier told him to get back to work.


Plaintiff Kimberly Valliere's claims arose from her allegation of two incidents of harassment by Workman during the month of May 1995. She recalled that the first incident occurred sometime in May when she went to retrieve a television from the stockroom. She said Workman was in the stockroom, he pressed against her, pushed his tongue into her mouth and she could feel his erection, but he fled when a customer came near. Although she failed to report the attack at closing that night, she said she mentioned to assistant manager Bill Goliat that Workman was harassing her. She conceded that she offered no details about the incident to him. Then, several nights later, she said a second incident occurred in the stockroom. She claimed that Workman again attempted to hug and kiss, but this time he also touched her breast. The next day, she told Mr. Ashton that Workman was bugging her, but again she failed to inform the management of Workman's sexually offensive behavior. As a result of these incidents, Kimberly testified that she was scared, suffered from depression and her stomach problems flared up.


Psychologist Deborah Koricke, Ph.D., was called upon by plaintiff's counsel to evaluate whether Kimberly and Carolyn suffered psychological damage as a result of Workman's alleged sexual harassment. Dr. Koricke saw Kimberly four times; she tested and evaluated her in November 1995 and early 1996 and concluded that Kimberly was very distressed with anxiety and depression and suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder. Dr. Koricke met with Carolyn three times in November and December 1995 and January 1996 for testing and for the evaluation of test results. Dr. Koricke said that Carolyn relayed the particulars of the incident to her and explained that she took sick leave from both school and work during May 1995 due to the incident. Carolyn's test results revealed that she was free of disabling anxiety or guilt. Moreover, Carolyn denied all symptoms of depression and post- traumatic stress disorder. Dr. Koricke noted no permanency or residual effects on either girl as a result of the incidents.


At the close of all testimony, Kmart renewed its motion for directed verdict on the two claims remaining against it, negligence in maintaining a hostile work environment and negligence in the hiring and in the retention of James Workman. The motion was denied by the court and the matter went to the jury. The jury answered a series of ten interrogatories and returned verdicts in favor of Carolyn Steppe against James Workman for compensatory damages in the amount of $13,000 and punitive damages in the amount of $20,000. The jury found in favor of Carolyn Steppe against Kmart in the amount of $300,000. The jury found in favor of James Workman on Kimberly Valliere's claims against him and in favor of Kimberly Valliere on her claims against Kmart in the amount of $50,000.


Kmart, asserting that insufficient evidence was presented to support the verdict and the jury's answers to the interrogatories were inconsistent with the verdicts, moved the court alternatively for judgment notwithstanding the verdict pursuant to Civ.R. 50(B); for a new trial pursuant to Civ.R. 59(A) and 49(B); and for judgm

Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 

Ohio Employee Leasing Services    Employee Leasing Services


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.

Employee Leasing Who Is the Employer? Hiring/Firing Issues
Employee Leasing Advantage Employee Leasing Models Human Resources Management
Employee Handbooks American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Employers Practice Liability Insurance (EPL)
Employment Forms, Postings Sexual Harassment at workplace Employee Leasing vs. Temp
Administrative Services Organization (ASO) Human Resources Organization (HRO) Professional Employer Organization (PEO)
Payroll Services Human Resources Workers Compensation Codes
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
SiteMap  | Trading Partners  | Register  | Case LawsFAQ | Employee Leasing Forum | Employee Leasing Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Terms of Service  Copyright © 2004. “Employee-Leasing.org ”. All rights reserved.