Gilster v. Primebank
| Decision Date | 14 August 2012 |
| Docket Number | No. C 10–4084–MWB.,C 10–4084–MWB. |
| Citation | 884 F.Supp.2d 811 |
| Parties | Mindy GILSTER, Plaintiff, v. PRIMEBANK, Primebank, Inc., and Joseph Strub, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Brooke Catherine Timmer, Whitney C. Judkins, Fiedler & Timmer, P.L.L.C., Urbandale, IA, for Plaintiff.
Douglas L. Phillips, Klass Law Firm, L.L.P., Sioux City, IA, for Defendants.
Plaintiff Mindy Gilster testified at trial, “I wanted to be left alone, and I wanted to do my work....” Gilster expected, as an employee with defendant Primebank, only the simplest guarantee of workplace equality promised by Title VII and the Iowa Civil Rights Act. “Men and women have every right to be left alone without sexual abuse in the workplace.” Eich v. Bd. of Regents for Cent. Mo. State Univ., 350 F.3d 752, 762 (8th Cir.2003). Likewise, men and women have every right to be left alone after they report sexual harassment. A jury found that defendants Joseph Strub and Primebank violated these basic tenets of our civil rights laws when Joseph Strub sexually harassed Mindy Gilster and, later, when Strub and Primebank retaliated against Gilster for reporting the sexual harassment and retaliation she experienced. The jury awarded a total of $900,301.22 in damages.
Before me now are the parties' post-trial motions.
This sexual harassment and retaliation case arose from plaintiff Mindy Gilster's employment with Primebank at its Sioux City, Iowa, branch, where she worked as a credit administrator from December 3, 2007, until her termination on February 10, 2011. Gilster brought claims of sexual harassment and retaliation, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the Iowa Civil Rights Act (ICRA), Iowa Code § 216.1 et seq., against Primebank, Primebank, Inc.,1and Joseph Strub, Primebank's Sioux City market president and Gilster's supervisor, alleging that Joseph Strub sexually harassed her and that Strub...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kassman v. KPMG LLP
...547–48 (9th Cir.2006); Chen–Oster, 2012 WL 205875, at *5–6,overruled in relevant part by877 F.Supp.2d at 121–22;Gilster v. Primebank, 884 F.Supp.2d 811, 864–866 (N.D.Iowa 2012); Levin v. Madigan, 697 F.Supp.2d 958, 975 (N.D.Ill.2010); see also True v. Neb., 612 F.3d 676, 679 (8th Cir.2010) ......
-
Haskenhoff v. Homeland Energy Solutions, LLC
...the adverse employment decision.' " (alteration in original) (quoting City of Hampton , 554 N.W.2d at 535 )); Gilster v. Primebank , 884 F.Supp.2d 811, 831 n.4 (N.D. Iowa 2012) (analyzing both Title VII and ICRA together using determinative-factor approach), overruled on other grounds , 747......
-
Morales v. Farmland Foods, Inc.
...circuits is to permit awards to reimburse counsel for the reasonable costs of online legal research."); see Gilster v. Primebank, 884 F. Supp. 2d 811, 880 (N.D. Iowa 2012) (finding that computerized legal research fees are traditionally billed to clients and, thus, if reasonable and adequat......
-
Hagen v. Siouxland Obstetrics & Gynecology, P.C.
...the date of the commencement of the action,” consistent with the plain language in Iowa Code § 668.13(1). See Gilster v. Primebank, 884 F.Supp.2d 811, 884 (N.D.Iowa 2012) (awarding pre-judgment interest under Iowa law on a plaintiff's entire back pay award accruing from the date the plainti......