Tammie Ackelson v. Manley Toy Direct, L.L.C. And Toy Network, L.L.C. v. Manley Toy Direct, L.L.C.. And Toy Network, L.L.C.
832 N.W.2d 678
| Iowa | 2013Background
- Ackelson, Drake, and Miller were employees of Manley Toy Direct and Toy Network in Indianola, Iowa.
- The employees filed 2010 lawsuits alleging ICRA-based sexual harassment, sex discrimination, and retaliation; they sought punitive damages.
- Manley Toy moved to strike the punitive-damages request; the district court granted the motion.
- The plaintiffs appealed the ruling on punitive damages; the Iowa Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeal.
- The court reviews whether the ICRA permits punitive damages and whether prior Iowa precedent allows such relief.
- The court ultimately affirms the district court’s ruling and remands for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does ICRA authorize punitive damages? | Ackelson argues ICRA permits punitive damages. | Manley Toy argues ICRA does not authorize punitive damages. | Punitive damages are not available under ICRA. |
| Should Iowa rely on Chauffeurs, Smith, and McElroy to interpret ICRA’s damages scope? | Ackelson contends McElroy changed Smith to allow punitive damages. | Toy maintains the traditional rule against punitive damages remains. | Iowa adheres to the rule that punitive damages require express statutory authorization. |
| Can public policy or national trends override the statutory interpretation of ICRA to permit punitive damages? | Ackelson argues public policy supports punitive damages in civil rights cases. | Toy argues legislative acquiescence and public policy do not override statute. | Public policy and external trends do not override the express statutory standard. |
Key Cases Cited
- Chauffeurs, Teamsters & Helpers, Local Union No. 238 v. Iowa Civil Rights Comm’n, 394 N.W.2d 375 (Iowa 1986) (damages scope does not imply punitive damages without express authorization)
- Smith v. ADM Feed Corp., 456 N.W.2d 378 (Iowa 1990) (ICRA punitive damages not permitted absent express authorization)
- McElroy v. State, 703 N.W.2d 385 (Iowa 2005) (overruled Smith on jury trial; reaffirmed need for express authorization for remedies)
- Van Meter Indus. v. Mason City Human Rights Comm’n, 675 N.W.2d 503 (Iowa 2004) (supports that absence of punitive damages implies absence of them in analogous settings)
- City of Hampton v. Iowa Civil Rights Comm’n, 554 N.W.2d 532 (Iowa 1996) (emotional-distress award evaluated in light of punitive-damages framework)