Hart v. Connected Wireless, Inc.
| Decision Date | 16 November 2020 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 2:17-CV-186-TS |
| Parties | RYAN HART, Plaintiff, v. CONNECTED WIRELESS, INC., et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Utah |
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Ryan Hart's ("Plaintiff") Post-Evidentiary Briefing Re: Damages. For the reasons discussed below, the Court will grant $97,841.30 in back pay, $50,000 in compensatory damages, and $102,538.50 in attorney's fees. The Court also finds C&C Communications, LLC ("C&C") and Connected Wireless President Anthony Morrison ("Morrison") should be held jointly and severally liable for these damages.
Plaintiff began work as a sales consultant for Connected Wireless Inc.'s ("Connected Wireless") Provo Towne Center store around December 17, 2012.1 He experienced discrimination based on his disability—in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq—and left employment on March 19, 2013.2 On August 30, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Charge of Discrimination against Connected Wireless with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") and Utah Antidiscrimination and LaborDivision ("UALD").3 After undergoing the required administrative process,4 Plaintiff filed a complaint against Connected Wireless on January 17, 2017, in the Fourth Judicial District Court of Utah County.5 Initially, Connected Wireless participated in the litigation, removing it to federal court on March 14, 2017,6 then filing an answer on April 4, 2017.7 On January 18, 2018, parties attempted but did not reach settlement.8 On February 12, 2019, the Court received notice of Connected Wireless's bankruptcy filing, which stayed proceedings in this Court.9 On May 24, 2019, Connected Wireless petitioned to dismiss that bankruptcy case as "error."10 On May 28, 2019, the Court received motions for Connected Wireless's counsel to withdraw11—appending a letter from Morrison stating that Connected Wireless had "ceased operations," that its "corporate entity has been dissolved by the Utah Division of Corporations and Commercial Code," and that it therefore "is unable to continue participating in this matter."12 The Court granted those motions.13 On July 19, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Reopen Case, as the automatic stay from Connected Wireless's bankruptcy proceedings was lifted July 1, 2019.14 On September 24, 2019,this Court ordered Connected Wireless to appoint new counsel within fifteen days.15 Connected Wireless ignored that order. On October 24, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Default Judgment.16 Then on October 29, 2019, this Court granted Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen Case and entered default judgment against Connected Wireless based on its failures to comply with Court Orders or participate in this litigation.17
On February 24, 2020, the Court held an evidentiary hearing regarding damages.18 Connected Wireless did not participate. Plaintiff and his father, Craig Hart, testified concerning Plaintiff's mental health history, the trauma Plaintiff experienced from disability discrimination at Connected Wireless, and the lasting impact of that trauma.19 According to their accounts, Plaintiff has suffered from anxiety and depression since adolescence.20 He was also diagnosed with ADHD.21 However, before working for Connected Wireless, Plaintiff was "extremely motivated" and able to hold down full-time jobs "for years at a time."22 This included stressful jobs at the Sherriff's Department and at Brent Brown Toyota where he had to make car sales to earn a commission.23 Plaintiff testified that at Connected Wireless he was initially "meeting and surpassing . . . the goals for not only customer satisfaction, but also . . . sales."24 MichaelDunning—Plaintiff's former direct manager at Connected Wireless—verifies this in a signed, undated statement.
[Plaintiff] became a valuable asset to the company as he mastered the technical side of our operations and provided excellent customer service. He demonstrated a natural ability to make customers feel important, supported, and confident in the services that Connected Wireless provided. I was impressed with how patient and personable [Plaintiff] was with customers as he helped them work through their frustrations with service issues. He is a good problem solver. He became eligible for bonuses after his training period and started earning them because of his good work. [Plaintiff] was pleasant to work with, and tried hard to get along with other employees, including one who was quite difficult to manage. He also assured the store was neat and orderly. I thought that his leadership abilities and people skills would eventually land him in a management position.25
However, Plaintiff's progression at work was interrupted when management began requiring sales consultants to memorize a verbatim script.26 Plaintiff worked on the script, with his father's help, but could not commit it to memory due to his learning disability.27 Plaintiff's father reports this frustration took an alarming mental toll on Plaintiff.28 Plaintiff discussed his need for ADA accommodation five times with individuals in Connected Wireless management—including Morrison, HR manager Gary Rhay, District Manager Brian Rhay—who is also Gary Rhay's son—and Michael Dunning.29 Plaintiff testified that Brian Rhay "brushed me off."30 Michael Dunning reports:
[o]n at least two occasions during February to March 2013 time frame, I heard Brian brush off [Plaintiff's] explanation of his disability and make threatening statements about his employment if he did not memorize the script. [Plaintiff] asked Brian on those occasions if there was a way he could be exempt from the requirementbecause of his disability if he covered the main points of the script in his own words. Brian told [Plaintiff] he was required to memorize the script like everyone else.31
On March 14, 2013, Plaintiff emailed Morrison regarding his disability, requesting accommodation and explaining that Brian Rhay had threatened him with termination if he could not memorize the script despite his disability.32 Morrison forwarded the email to Gary Rhay the following day but does not appear to have responded to Plaintiff.33 On March 18, 2013, Gary Rhay emailed Plaintiff requesting documentation of his learning disability.34 On March 19, 2013 at 12:50 p.m., Plaintiff responded with an email attaching a medical letter from clinical neuropsychologist, Dr. Erin Bigler, Ph. D.35 Her note, also dated March 19, 2013, states that Plaintiff "has a long-standing history of learning disability" that "makes it very challenging to memorize verbatim material."36 Dr. Bigler requests "that accommodations be given to him for information that requires memorization."37 Gary Rhay forwarded the email to his son, Brian Rhay, on March 19, 2013 at 3:17 p.m.38 Morrison later claimed documentation of Plaintiff's disability was "received" only after Plaintiff left his employment.39 This is not accurate. However, it is plausible Morrison discovered the medical letter only after Plaintiff leftemployment, as Plaintiff emailed it to Gary Rhay at 12:50 p.m. on March 19, 2013, and resigned sometime later that day.40
After sending the medical letter to his employer, Plaintiff got a ride with his father to work.41 In the car, Plaintiff placed a phone call to Gary Rhay, confiding that he did not want to "stir the waters" but that he had a child and family and was worried about his job.42 Gary Rhay responded that "you've already stirred the waters" and hung up on him.43 Plaintiff was stunned and feared he would be fired that day at work.44 He struggled to get out of the car.45 He arrived to find Brian Rhay waiting for him.46 Michael Dunning shared Plaintiff's perception that Brian was there "to make good on his prior threats to terminate [Plaintiff's] employment."47 Plaintiff describes Brian Rhay as a "bully" who "touted himself as the vice president of the company."48 In the conversation that immediately followed—which Plaintiff recorded—Brian told Plaintiff:
No one talked to me about [your disability] because it doesn't matter. Either you can do the job or you can't do the job. It's a right to work state. . . . Your disabilities and stuff like that don't matter. Now, I'm sorry, they don't. You know there's no state law protecting you in a right to work state against a memorization disability. Unless you can prove that disability, and it's on file with the state.49
At the point of this conversation, it is unclear whether Brian Rhay had seen Plaintiff's medical letter forwarded to him at 3:17 p.m. that day.50 In a July 3, 2014 interview with a UALD investigator, Brian Rhay denied ever having made the above recorded statement.51
With that, Plaintiff resigned on March 19, 2013, feeling certain he would be fired and lose his bonus unless he did so.52 Plaintiff explains that this experience "[m]ade me feel worthless, like I didn't matter, that I had no options."53 "And when I was told my disability didn't matter and - amongst other things by Mr. Rhay, something broke inside of me."54 As a result, Plaintiff lost over twenty pounds within a couple weeks.55 He experienced significant depression, visited medical professionals, started new anti-anxiety and anti-depression medications.56 He explains, 57 Plaintiff experienced severe headaches, chest pains, and insomnia.58 He started having panic attacks for the first time, which came when he tried to interview for a new job.59 When he did manage to get a new job, Plaintiff reports "I couldn't handle it," and it lasted only a couple weeks.60 His depression jumped from a manageable 3-4 on the pain scale, before the events atConnected Wireless, to a 7-9.61 Plaintiff's anxiety became "crippling," and at times he could...
To continue reading
Request your trial