Slusser v. Vantage Builders, Inc.
2013 NMCA 073
N.M.2013Background
- Plaintiff Diane Slusser was employed in Defendant Vantage Builders, Inc.'s accounting department from 2002 to February 2006 as a manager.
- In February 2006, Slusser was terminated due to a company restructuring that eliminated her managerial role.
- After termination, a younger employee, Karie Trahan, reportedly took over some of Slusser's duties at a lower salary.
- Slusser later learned of Trahan's involvement and alleged discrimination based on age, prompting discovery of facts suggesting discriminatory intent.
- In 2007 Slusser filed a New Mexico Human Rights Act/EEOC charge, alleging age discrimination and retaliation; the district court granted summary judgment on statute-of-limitations grounds and on failure to prove tolling or estoppel.
- The court concluded the statute of limitations began at the date of termination (Feb. 2006) and was not extended by equitable tolling or equitable estoppel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| When does the limitations period begin for NM age discrimination claims? | Slusser argues discovery of discrimination should toll start. | Vantage contends clock starts at adverse action, not discovery of intent. | Start date is the date of the adverse action. |
| Does equitable tolling apply to suspend the statute here? | If information emerged after termination showing discrimination, tolling should apply. | Plaintiff failed to show diligence or extraordinary circumstances to toll the clock. | Equitable tolling does not apply. |
| Does equitable estoppel apply to bar the statute defense here? | Defendant's inconsistent termination reasons could constitute concealment of discriminatory intent. | Inconsistencies in reasons do not amount to fraudulent concealment of the claim. | Equitable estoppel does not apply. |
Key Cases Cited
- Cada v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 920 F.2d 446 (7th Cir. 1990) (equitable tolling for access to vital information; tolling requires diligent pursuit)
- Morris v. Gov't Dev. Bank of Puerto Rico, 27 F.3d 746 (1st Cir. 1994) (limitations begin with adverse action; discovery of intent not needed)
- Sturniolo v. Sheaffer, Eaton, Inc., 15 F.3d 1023 (11th Cir. 1994) (limitations commenced at adverse action; tolling discussed in context)
- Rhodes v. Guiberson Oil Tools Div., 927 F.2d 876 (5th Cir. 1991) (misrepresentation delaying rehire consideration as grounds for tolling)
- Meyer v. Riegel Prods. Corp., 720 F.2d 303 (3d Cir. 1983) (limitations begin at adverse action; tolling possible under certain conditions)