Ricky v. Mapco, Inc., 93-5214
Decision Date | 21 March 1995 |
Docket Number | No. 93-5214,93-5214 |
Citation | 50 F.3d 874 |
Parties | 68 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 1745, 66 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 43,566 Thomas E. RICKY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MAPCO, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant-Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
Karen L. Long, Rosenstein, Fist & Ringold, Tulsa, OK, for plaintiff-appellant.
John T. Schmidt, Conner & Winters (Randolph L. Jones, Jr. and C. Kevin Morrison, Conner & Winters; James N. Cundiff, Mapco, Inc., with him on the brief), Tulsa, OK, for defendant-appellee.
Before BRORBY, SETH, and LAY, * Circuit Judges.
Ricky was an attorney at Mapco from 1980 until he was terminated in November 1989. In late 1991, he filed this action claiming Mapco terminated him because of his age in violation of the ADEA and Oklahoma public policy. Mapco asserted an affirmative defense, urging Ricky's claim was barred because he had sexually harassed a Mapco secretary and that if Mapco had known about these incidents, it would have terminated him for that misconduct. On this basis, it argues that neither backpay nor any other remedy is available to Ricky under the ADEA.
Mapco offered evidence that Ricky had sexually harassed his secretary, Jane Malone, from the time he was hired until she left Mapco's employment because of performance problems, which were unrelated to her work for Ricky, in December 1987. After her termination, Malone filed suit against Mapco in December 1989, claiming Mapco had discriminated against her. Among Malone's allegations were charges that Ricky had sexually harassed her. 1
In Ricky's ADEA action against Mapco, the district court bifurcated the trial into two parts: liability and damages. After the liability phase, the jury returned a verdict for Ricky, finding Mapco liable for age discrimination. During the damage phase of the trial, the district court allowed Mapco to present evidence that it would have terminated Ricky for his misconduct involving Malone if it had been aware of it. The court instructed the jury: "Thus, in this case, if you find that the defendant would have terminated plaintiff if it had known that certain legitimate reason or reasons existed for his termination--and that reason(s) alone would justify termination--then plaintiff is not entitled to any remedy...." Appellant's App. at 448 (Jury Instructions in Damage Phase). The jury awarded Ricky no damages, and this appeal followed.
In Summers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 864 F.2d 700, 708 (10th Cir.1988), this Court held that an employee may be barred from recovering for a discriminatory discharge if the employer discovers after the discharge that the employee engaged in misconduct justifying termination. On the authority of Summers, the district court permitted Mapco to present evidence concerning Ricky's alleged misconduct involving Malone to the jury during the damage phase of the trial. Based on the jury's finding, the court then barred Ricky from any remedy.
On appeal, Ricky argues that the alleged misconduct was known to the company before his termination and therefore does not qualify as after-acquired evidence. On that basis, Ricky urges all evidence concerning allegations of misconduct involving Malone should have been excluded from both phases of the trial. The district court and the parties agree that Mapco's management knew about the initial proposition Ricky made to Malone. 2 The court concluded, however, that Mapco should be able to argue to the jury that had it known about Malone's allegations that Ricky renewed his request for sexual favors several times after the initial incident and also made a racial slur in her presence, it would have terminated him.
Ricky argues that no reasonable jury could conclude that Mapco would have terminated Ricky based on Malone's allegations that he continued to sexually harass her and made a racial slur in her presence because those allegations are not credible and because Mapco's management failed to respond when it learned of the first incident. We agree with the district court, however, that the fact-finder is in a better position to make that determination. Thus, we find the district court did not err in permitting Mapco to present evidence to the jury concerning what it would have done if it knew about the allegations that Ricky renewed his request for sexual favors and made a racial remark to Malone. 3
Ricky next argues that the allegations of misconduct should not act as a complete bar to his recovery, but rather should only partially reduce the damages to which he is entitled. In light of McKennon, we must now agree with Ricky. In McKennon, the Supreme Court rejected this Court's reasoning in Summers and held that after-acquired evidence of misconduct cannot act as a complete bar to recovery in an ADEA action, but rather only affects the amount of damages an employee may recover. McKennon, --- U.S. at ----, 115 S.Ct. at 887.
McKennon makes clear that Mapco must demonstrate to the jury, not only that it was unaware of the allegations of continued misconduct when Ricky was terminated, but also that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Aranda v. Foamex Int'l
... ... FOAMEX INTERNATIONAL d/b/a FXI, Inc., Defendant. No. CIV 120405 JB/ACT. United States District Court, D. New ... ...
-
Johnson v. Norton Cnty. Hosp.
...discovered by defendant after it discharged plaintiff, summary judgment in favor of plaintiff is warranted. See Ricky v. Mapco, Inc. , 50 F.3d 874, 876 (10th Cir. 1995) ( McKennon v. Nashville Banner Pub. Co. , 513 U.S. 352, 115 S.Ct. 879, 130 L.Ed.2d 852 (1005) makes clear that an employer......
-
Zisumbo v. Ogden Reg'l Med. Ctr.
...the information that it later claims would have provided an independent and legitimate reason for termination. See Ricky v. Mapco, Inc., 50 F.3d 874, 875–76 (10th Cir.1995) (acknowledging that employer must show it was unaware of allegations of misconduct when employee was terminated).ORMC ......
-
Hipp v. Liberty Nat. Life Ins. Co.
...v. Dunn Construction Co., 62 F.3d 374, 377 (11th Cir.1995); and sexually harassing a subordinate employee, see Ricky v. Mapco, Inc., 50 F.3d 874, 875 (10th Cir.1995). In contrast, although the actions Plaintiff Stein took were a violation of company rules, they would not otherwise have been......
-
Plaintiff's Prior Acts
...employees. Defendant took the position that if it knew about these allegations, it would have fired the Plaintiff. Ricky v. Mapco, Inc. , 50 F.3d 874 (10th Cir. 1995). 2. Defendant learns during litigation that the plaintiff stole confidential, proprietary information after being informed o......
-
Age discrimination
...discharge, and that the employer would have discharged the plaintiff if it had known about those allegations. Ricky v. Mapco, Inc. , 50 F.3d 874, 876 (10th Cir. 1995). 4. Offsets to Damages §2:770 After-Acquired Evidence Once an employer learns about employee wrong-doing that would lead to ......