Sheriff of Suffolk County v. Jail Officers & Employees of Suffolk County
465 Mass. 584
| Mass. | 2013Background
- Upton, a Suffolk County jail officer, was discharged in December 1999 after allegedly filing untimely and false reports about an inmate assault.
- An arbitrator reinstated Upton, suspended him six months without pay, and ordered full back pay and benefits minus outside earnings and unemployment compensation.
- Superior Court and Appeals Court affirmed the arbitration award; the Supreme Judicial Court later reviewed and affirmed the judgment confirming the award.
- In August 2009, the union sought contempt for failure to pay back pay, prompting an evidentiary development to calculate offsets and back pay accruing since 1999.
- A 2011 bench trial concluded Upton had no duty to mitigate or the sheriff failed to prove mitigation, and held no postjudgment interest due.
- On appeal, the sheriff’s mitigation stance was deemed waived, and sovereign immunity was upheld as to postjudgment interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duty to mitigate damages exist for Upton | Upton had no duty to mitigate per the judgment and related authority | Sheriff bears burden to prove mitigation and offset opportunities | Upton has a duty to mitigate; burden not met by sheriff |
| Waiver of mitigation issue | Issue raised timely or implicitly acknowledged | Waived because not raised within arbitration challenge period | Mitigation issue waived; even on merits, sheriff failed to prove it |
| Postjudgment interest and sovereign immunity | Interest should accrue against the sheriff; waiver via arbitration may apply | Sovereign immunity bars postjudgment interest absent clear waiver | No postjudgment interest awarded; immunity upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- McKenna v. Commissioner of Mental Health, 347 Mass. 674 (Mass. 1964) (burden to prove mitigation; offsets not sufficient alone)
- Ryan v. Superintendent of Schs. of Quincy, 374 Mass. 670 (Mass. 1978) (public employees’ duty to mitigate after reinstatement)
- Black v. School Comm. of Malden, 369 Mass. 657 (Mass. 1976) (definition of comparable employment for mitigation)
- Maynard v. Royal Worcester Corset Co., 200 Mass. 1 (Mass. 1908) (duty to mitigate damages for discharged contract workers)
- Murphy Co. (International Union of Operating Eng’rs, Local No. 841 v. Murphy Co.), 82 F.3d 185 (7th Cir. 1996) (waiver; failure to raise mitigation before arbitration affects remedies)
- Joe Mitchell Buick, Inc. (Automobile Mechanics Local 701 v. Joe Mitchell Buick, Inc.), 930 F.2d 576 (7th Cir. 1991) (arbitrator may decide mitigation; silence may indicate no offset)
- Ford Motor Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Comm’n, 458 U.S. 219 (U.S. 1982) (unemployed need not take demeaning work; comparable work standards)
- C & M Constr. Co. v. Commonwealth, 396 Mass. 390 (Mass. 1985) (sovereign immunity and postjudgment interest limitations)
- Perini Corp. (Massachusetts Highway Dep’t v. Perini Corp.), 79 Mass. App. Ct. 430 (Mass. App. Ct. 2011) (waiver of sovereign immunity via arbitration agreement)
- Blue Hills Regional Dist. Sch. Comm. v. Flight, 383 Mass. 642 (Mass. 1981) (arbitrator’s postaward interest not subject to certain contract interest rules)
- Chapman v. University of Mass. Med. Ctr., 423 Mass. 584 (Mass. 1996) (sovereign immunity limits on postjudgment interest; waiver required)