Mathiason v. Aquinas Home Health Care, Inc.
187 F. Supp. 3d 1269
D. Kan.2016Background
- Plaintiff was hired in March 2013 as a full‑time Nurse Manager ($34/hr) at Aquinas Home Health Care.
- In June 2014 plaintiff was hospitalized after a suicide attempt related to depression and anxiety; her physician ordered outpatient therapy three times per week for four weeks.
- Plaintiff requested leave/accommodation for the brief therapy; her supervisor, Eileen Orel, visited plaintiff at home and forced a choice: resign or accept demotion to a Float Nurse with unpredictable hours and loss of managerial duties and pay.
- That same day Orel emailed staff describing plaintiff’s absence as "personal issues" and stating plaintiff had "chosen not to return" to the Nurse Manager position; plaintiff thereafter did not return to work and alleges constructive discharge and failure to accommodate under the ADA.
- Defendant failed to maintain a registered agent; service was made via the Kansas Secretary of State, defendant did not respond, clerk’s default was entered, and plaintiff moved for default judgment. Plaintiff presented evidence at a damages hearing; defendant did not appear.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Service & default | Service via Secretary of State was proper; default should stand | No response or opposition (no appearance) | Default entered; defendant precluded from contesting facts supporting liability |
| ADA discrimination / failure to accommodate | Aquinas demoted and constructively discharged plaintiff because of disability and refused a temporary schedule accommodation | No answer or defense presented | Court finds Aquinas liable for disability discrimination and failure to accommodate; constructive discharge established |
| Back pay, mitigation, prejudgment interest, front pay | Plaintiff seeks back pay ($54,126.48), prejudgment interest, and 3 years front pay ($24,585.60) offset by mitigation earnings | No opposition to amounts presented at hearing | Court awards $54,126.48 back pay, $7,935.88 prejudgment interest (10% KS rate compounded annually for 23 months), and $24,585.60 front pay for three years |
| Compensatory, punitive damages, fees & costs | Requests $25,000 compensatory, $25,000 punitive (cap applies), and $35,483.65 attorneys’ fees/costs | No response | Court awards $25,000 compensatory, $25,000 punitive (Kolstad standard satisfied), and $35,483.65 fees & costs; total judgment $172,131.61 plus post‑judgment interest |
Key Cases Cited
- Kolstad v. American Dental Assoc., 527 U.S. 526 (establishes malice or reckless indifference standard for punitive damages under federal discrimination statutes)
- Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405 (back pay is appropriate relief for unlawful employment discrimination)
- BMW of North Am., Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 (punitive damages should bear a reasonable relationship to compensatory damages)
- Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886 (standards for determining reasonable attorneys’ fees)
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (lodestar method and adjustments for attorneys’ fees)
- Ramos v. Lamm, 713 F.2d 546 (use of prevailing market rates in fee awards; guidance on fee determinations in the Tenth Circuit)
- Daniel v. Loveridge, 32 F.3d 1472 (definition of back pay period and mitigation principles)
- Gonzales v. Sandoval County, 2 F.Supp.2d 1442 (prejudgment interest and remedies discussion under ADA)