A federal appeals panel won't let the Chicago Park District slide on a $300,000 payout to a Hispanic former park supervisor who accused the park district of discrimination, asserting she was hounded by park district investigators until she was ultimately fired.
A federal appeals panel, however, has instructed a federal district court to “show its work” in how it tacked on an additional $55,000 to the jury’s verdict, under the label of a “tax component.”
On April 7, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago upheld the jury verdict and ultimate judgment in favor of plaintiff Lydia Vega in her action against the city park district.
Vega had sued the district in 2013, after she was fired from her job as a park supervisor. According to the appellate opinion, she had worked for the park district for 20 years and had been promoted numerous times.
However, in 2012, she was accused of falsifying timesheets, of allegedly not being at work when she claimed on her timesheets that she was. This accusation triggered an investigation, during which the judges noted she was tailed, questioned and video recorded over the course of several weeks. According to the opinion, she was surveilled 252 times over the course of 56 days.
The investigation ultimately led to her termination.
Vega then sued. She asserted the park district’s actions were out of line with the evidence and violated the provisions of the district’s union rules, and she was never allowed to truly defend herself against the accusations.
She further asserted the investigation and termination were part of a pattern of discriminatory behavior against Hispanic park district employees. In the court opinion, the judges noted Vega presented evidence showing white and African American supervisors accused of similar behavior were not surveilled as intensely as was she, nor were they fired. Some were not even disciplined.
At trial, a jury awarded her $750,000. However, the award was reduced to the maximum allowed under law, $300,000.
U.S. District Judge Jorge Alonso also awarded Vega an additional sum of more than $55,000 as a “tax-component award.”
Vega had requested only about $30,000 as a tax component.
Both sides appealed.
The park district asserted the verdict was incorrect, while Vega asked the appellate court to reinstate her $750,000 jury verdict.
The appellate panel, however, said the jury’s verdict in favor of Vega was not out of line, and Judge Alonso had ruled correctly in reducing the award to $300,000.
The panel’s opinion was authored by Seventh Circuit Judge Amy C. Barrett. Seventh Circuit Chief Judge Diane P. Wood and Circuit Judge Frank Easterbrook concurred.
“Vega presented the investigation as a determined effort to build a case against her rather than a neutral effort to discover the truth,” Judge Barrett wrote. “The jury was free to side with Vega by concluding that the charges of timesheet falsification were a pretextual reason for firing her.”
The appellate judges, however, said Judge Alonso erred in not explaining how he arrived at the $55,000 “tax component” award.
The panel sent the matter back to the district judge for further proceedings on that aspect of the case.
Vega has been represented by attorneys James Bryan Wood and Ryan Odell Estes, of The Wood Law Office LLC, of Chicago; and attorney Catherine Simmons-Gill, of Chicago.
The Chicago Park District has been represented by attorneys Annette M. McGarry and Marianne C. Holzhall, of McGarry & McGarry LLC, of Chicago.