McKenna v. Pacific Rail Service

Decision Date29 March 1993
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. 91-693.
Citation817 F. Supp. 498
PartiesPeter McKENNA, et al. v. PACIFIC RAIL SERVICE.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Louie Nikolaidis, Thomas M. Kennedy, Daniel E. Clifton, Lewis, Greenwald, Kennedy, Lewis, Clifton & Schwartz, P.C., East Rutherford, NJ, for plaintiffs.

James L. Sonageri, Sonageri & Howley, Hackensack, NJ, for plaintiff Anthony Nazare.

Roger D. Meade, Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff & Tichy, Baltimore, MD, Liza Walsh, Connell, Foley & Geiser, Roseland, NJ, for Pacific Rail Service.

POLITAN, District Judge.

This matter comes before the court on the following motions: (1) defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b); (2) defendant's motion seeking a new trial, or in the alternative, for judgment as a matter of law on damages or for remittitur; (3) plaintiffs' motion for prejudgment interest; (4) plaintiffs' application for attorneys' fees and (5) plaintiff Nazare's motion to vacate his dismissal from the Complaint. For the reasons outlined herein, defendant's motion for judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability is DENIED; defendant's motion seeking a new trial is DENIED; defendant's motion seeking judgment as a matter of law on the issue of damages is GRANTED WITH RESPECT TO FRONT PAY; plaintiffs' motion for prejudgment interest is GRANTED; plaintiffs' application for attorneys' fees is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; and plaintiff Nazare's motion to vacate his dismissal from the Complaint is DENIED.

BACKGROUND

On January 4, 1991, twenty-eight (28) individual plaintiffs filed an action in the New Jersey Superior Court, Law Division, against defendant Pacific Rail Service ("Pacific Rail") alleging age discrimination against plaintiffs in violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination ("LAD"), N.J.S.A. § 10:5-1, et seq. Plaintiffs claimed that Pacific Rail failed and refused to hire them because of their age. Thereafter, defendant removed the action to this court on diversity grounds.

Ten of the twenty-eight plaintiffs who had initiated this litigation have been dismissed from the case. One plaintiff whose claim was dismissed for failure to prosecute this matter, Anthony Nazare, has filed a motion to vacate his dismissal. This opinion addresses only Nazare's motion and the claims of the remaining eighteen plaintiffs. Plaintiffs' claims on liability, as tried before the jury, can be outlined as follows:

Consolidated Rail Corporation ("Conrail") operated an intermodal facility for the transportation, loading and unloading of freight at 6201 Tonnelle Avenue, North Bergen, New Jersey ("North Bergen terminal"). In the period from 1960 to September 1, 1990, lift operations at the North Bergen terminal were performed by employees of Pennsylvania Truck Lines, Inc. ("PTL"). PTL employees also performed lift operations at a Conrail intermodal facility in South Kearny, New Jersey. PTL was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Conrail until sometime in 1990, when a group, including certain PTL managers, purchased PTL in a leveraged buy-out.

Plaintiffs are former employees of PTL who worked as yard or clerical employees at the North Bergen terminal. All of the plaintiffs were over 40 years old as of August 1990. Many of the plaintiffs worked for PTL or its predecessor corporations for more than 30 years.

In June 1990, Conrail requested bids for its lift operations at the North Bergen terminal. Among the bidders was Pacific Rail. At the time, Pacific Rail was one of the largest independent intermodal operators in the United States. In or about mid-August 1990, Conrail awarded the bid to Pacific Rail.

Prior to September 1, 1990, Pacific Rail sought applicants to staff the North Bergen terminal. Jerry McCormick, a Pacific Rail Terminal Manager in Elizabeth and the future Pacific Rail Terminal Manager at North Bergen, was the person responsible for hiring individuals to work at the North Bergen terminal.

Shortly after Pacific Rail won the bid for the North Bergen lift operations, Peter McKenna, the shop steward for the North Bergen yard employees, informed Jerry McCormick by telephone that the North Bergen yard and clerical employees were willing to work for Pacific Rail. McKenna asked McCormick to supply the North Bergen employees with job applications. On August 20, 1990, McCormick went to the North Bergen yard and gave McKenna blank job applications. McKenna distributed the job applications to the North Bergen PTL employees.

On Friday August 24, 1990, McKenna returned approximately 25 completed applications from the North Bergen yard and clerical work force to McCormick. At that time, McKenna requested additional applications from McCormick. McKenna asked McCormick to return to the North Bergen terminal on the following Monday, August 27, 1990, to pick up the remaining completed applications. McCormick did not return, however, and on September 1, 1990, R. Michael List, the Pacific Rail Assistant General Manager, gained possession of the remaining job applications completed by North Bergen PTL employees.

Prior to September 1, 1990, aside from accepting some of the completed job application forms from McKenna, Pacific Rail made no effort to contact the North Bergen PTL yard or clerical employees concerning possible employment with Pacific Rail, even though Pacific Rail knew that the PTL employees desired to work for Pacific Rail. Nor did Pacific Rail make any effort to gain timely possession of the second group of completed applications.

List testified at trial that the only reason for the decision not to hire the former North Bergen PTL employees was the individual work habits and attitudes of those individuals. There is no evidence in the record, however, to indicate that Pacific Rail ever evaluated the individual work habits and attitudes of the former North Bergen employees. Nor is there any evidence in the record, aside from certain comments made by McCormick, that Pacific Rail had before it any information about the applicants from PTL in North Bergen apart from the responses in the perfunctory applications and, most importantly, the ages of the applicants.

Prior to September 1, 1990, Pacific Rail hired 13 yard employees and 8 clerks to staff the North Bergen operation. None of the individuals hired were former North Bergen PTL employees. Seventeen of the twenty-one people hired were under the age of 40. Subsequent to September 1, 1990, Pacific Rail hired four additional yard employees. All were under 40. No additional clerks were hired after September 1, 1990. In total, 21 of 25 clerical and yard employees hired by Pacific Rail were under 40 years old.

After September 1, 1990, John Gittens, a former PTL supervisor hired by Pacific Rail, recommended four former PTL North Bergen yard employees to be considered for employment: Ralph Angolemmo, Joe Armetta, Anthony Nazare and Richard Montacalvo. Angolemmo and Armetta were in their 20s and Nazare and Montacalvo were over 40. Pacific Rail hired Angolemmo and Armetta but did not hire Nazare and Montacalvo. Armetta and Angolemmo were two of the less qualified North Bergen PTL yard employees.

Ed Cifune, who was employed in a supervisory capacity for PTL at the North Bergen terminal from 1984 to 1990, testified at trial. From 1987 to 1988, Cifune was the Assistant Terminal Manager and from 1988 to 1990 he was the Terminal Manager at North Bergen. Cifune gave the clerks and yard employees high marks for their work habits and attitudes. For example, PTL had established Quality Circles in which a number of employees participated. The North Bergen workers had good attitudes and "they realized the importance of their jobs." The clerks were "well versed" in procedures. The PTL-North Bergen clerks "would go the extra mile to get the work done." From 1984 to 1990, the number of clerks in North Bergen decreased from 12 to 7, yet the work load increased. Cifune testified that "you didn't have to worry about the clerks, they knew their job and they did it." Cifune rated the work ethic of the PTL clerks in North Bergen favorably as compared with the work ethic of the clerks at the South Kearny terminal. The North Bergen clerks worked "more efficiently" than the South Kearny clerks.

There was testimony that the yard employees were also proficient in their jobs. They "knew their jobs and they knew what the jobs entailed." The yard employees were complimented by supervisors on the quality of their job performance.

Each of the plaintiffs was rated positively by his or her supervisor:

1) Jeanette McCafferty"She was an excellent worker."

2) Ralph Fernandez"He was a very meticulous worker."

3) Phyllis Lindh"She was always diligent in her job."

4) Paul Noethe"He saved Conrail in one instance alone fines of roughly $10,000 a trailer for 19 trailers they were asked to trace. I think that, in itself, speaks of the quality of his work."

5) Sal Petruzzelli"He was an excellent worker."

6) Ed Dechert"He did his job the way it was supposed to be done."

7) Pat Burwitz"She was very helpful and instrumental."

8) Mike Demone"He did an excellent job."

9) Peter McKenna"An excellent worker.... He always did his job."

10) Gregory Spina"Spina was an excellent packer operator." He was called "Mr. Wonderful" by the Terminal Manager Milarski.

11) Jack Ricciardi"He always did his job. He never shirked."

12) John Oliver—He was helpful in "getting the trains out on time."

13) Pincus Cohen"He was particularly helpful when programming a train."

14) Bill Harper"An excellent worker.... He never said no."

15) Dorrance Lindh—He "was as helpful as Mr. Cohen and the others on the shift in getting the trains out on time."

16) John Shea"He was one of the first to pick out any defects that might exist."

17) Bob Tighe"An excellent worker. He always gave...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Abrams v. Lightolier Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • March 24, 1995
    ...the NJLAD. See, e.g., Robb v. Ridgewood Bd. of Educ., 269 N.J.Super. 394, 635 A.2d 586 (Ch.Div.1993); see also McKenna v. Pacific Rail Serv., 817 F.Supp. 498, 518-19 (D.N.J.1993) (using federal caselaw under Sec. 1988 as a guide to attorneys' fee claim under NJLAD), rev'd in part on other g......
  • Kessler Inst. for Rehab. v. Essex Fells Mayor
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • January 31, 1995
    ...are consistently resolved by federal courts. E.g., Levinson v. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 868 F.2d 558 (3d Cir.1989), McKenna v. Pacific Rail Serv., 817 F.Supp. 498 (D.N.J.1993). Plaintiffs' analogy ignores an extremely important distinction between claims under the two enforcement provisions. Th......
  • Caldwell v. Haynes
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • July 6, 1994
    ...that trial court properly instructed jury on future lost wages "to account for inflation and present value"); McKenna v. Pacific Rail Serv., 817 F.Supp. 498, 516 (D.N.J.1993) (stating that Ruff "made clear that proper measure of damages is net income after taxes ... discounted to present va......
  • Gallo v. Salesian Soc., Inc.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • May 17, 1996
    ...entitled. Accord, Abrams v. Lightolier, Inc., 841 F.Supp. 584, 599 (D.N.J.1994), aff'd, 50 F.3d 1204 (1995), and McKenna v. Pacific Rail Serv., 817 F.Supp. 498, 518 (D.N.J.1993), vacated and remanded on other grounds, 32 F.3d 820 (3d Cir.1994), appeal after remand, 61 F.3d 895 (3d Cir.1995)......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT