743 S.E.2d 267
Va.2013Background
- Tarquini filed an amended complaint alleging breach of contract, quantum meruit, and a claim under the Equal Pay Act (EPA); she sought commissions, damages for EPA, liquidated damages, fees, and costs.
- NDI denied EPA liability but did not plead EPA defenses; discovery revealed a gender-neutral compensation system explanation for pay differentials.
- Two days before trial Tarquini moved in limine to bar EPA defenses absent pled defenses; the circuit court granted the motion.
- Bench trial held Tarquini entitled to commissions under the express contract; court did not consider EPA defenses and awarded EPA-related damages and fees.
- NDI appealed; the Virginia Supreme Court held EPA defenses are affirmative and not waived without pleading, reversed the circuit court, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are EPA defenses affirmative defenses under law? | EPA defenses are affirmative defenses under federal law. | EPA defenses do not require pleading; disclosure suffices. | EPA defenses are affirmative defenses. |
| Were EPA defenses waived by NDI's failure to plead them? | Waiver should not apply; defenses can be raised without explicit pleading. | Failure to plead constitutes waiver. | Not waived; not required to plead under Virginia procedure. |
| What procedural law governs pleading EPA defenses in Virginia courts? | Federal substantive law governs; VA procedure should align to protect federal rights. | VA pleading rules apply; consistency with state practice. | Virginia procedural law applies; EPA defenses need not be pled; reverse and remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Moreau v. Fuller, 276 Va. 127 (2008) (affirmative defenses; standard of pleading under VA law applies to EPA defenses)
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938) (fundamental Erie principle for applying substantive/state and procedural/federal rules)
- Hanna v. Plumer, 380 U.S. 460 (1965) (Erie/Reverse-Erie framework for choice of law in federal proceedings)
- County of Washington v. Gunther, 452 U.S. 161 (1981) (EPA defenses are affirmative defenses)
- Corning Glass Works v. Brennan, 417 U.S. 188 (1974) (EPA defenses treated as affirmative defenses)
- Brinkley-Obu v. Hughes Training, Inc., 36 F.3d 336 (4th Cir. 1994) (four affirmative EPA defenses; burden shifting)
- Strag v. Board of Trs., 55 F.3d 943 (4th Cir. 1995) (burden shifting in EPA defenses)
- Monahan v. Obici Med. Mgmt. Servs., 271 Va. 621, 628 S.E.2d 330 (2006) (affirmative defenses generally must be pled, with exceptions)
- Jones v. Jones, 249 Va. 565, 457 S.E.2d 365 (1995) (statute-of-limitations defense must be pled)
- Meadows v. Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co., 119 Va. 33 (1916) (application of Virginia procedure in FELA matters)