Thomas v. iStar Financial, Inc.
652 F.3d 141
2d Cir.2010Background
- In August 2003, Thomas was fired by iStar Financial, Inc. and Ed Baron.
- Thomas alleged Title VII retaliation and discrimination and a hostile work environment under NYCHRL.
- The district court granted summary judgment on hostile environment but allowed retaliation and discriminatory termination to proceed to trial.
- A jury found retaliation, awarded compensatory and punitive damages ($1.6 million).
- The district court later remitted punitive damages to $190,000 and awarded prejudgment interest.
- Thomas appealed, challenging the remittitur, prejudgment interest calculation, and various other rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Remittitur appealability | Thomas argues remittitur should be reviewable on appeal. | iStar contends remittitur was accepted and not appealable. | Thomas barred from challenging remittitur he accepted; appeal denied on this point. |
| Prejudgment interest rate – federal vs state | Thomas urged New York rate; federal rate was correct. | District court properly applied federal rate; correction allowed nunc pro tunc. | Judgments with mixed federal/state claims use federal rate; leave to correct clerical error granted nunc pro tunc. |
| Clerical error correction after appeal filed | District court could not correct while appeal was pending. | Correction appropriate and necessary. | Court granted leave to correct clerical mistake nunc pro tunc. |
| Other post-trial rulings | Challenge to hostile environment, punitive damages, expert testimony, and jury-determined back pay. | District court rulings were proper on those issues. | No reversible error found; district court judgments affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Donovan v. Penn Shipping Co., Inc., 429 U.S. 648 (U.S. 1977) (remittitur appealable issues cannot be challenged when accepted)
- Burger King Corp. v. Horn & Hardart Co., 893 F.2d 525 (2d Cir. 1990) (remittitur acceptance bars appeal)
- Leonhard v. United States, 633 F.2d 599 (2d Cir. 1980) (clerical corrections; need leave for pending appeal)
- Marfia v. T.C. Ziraat Bankasi, 147 F.3d 83 (2d Cir. 1998) (federal rate governs prejudgment interest when mixed claims)
- Robinson v. Metro-North Commuter R.R. Co., 267 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2001) (lost wages under Title VII may be tried to a jury with consent)
- Old Chief v. United States, 517 U.S. 177 (U.S. 1997) (evidentiary rulings and admissibility considerations)
- Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (U.S. 1999) (admissibility of expert testimony under Daubert-like standards)
- Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (U.S. 1993) (standard for severe or pervasive hostile work environment claims)