Technician fired after former employer interfered with job: Malice: Fraud: Lost wages: Verdict: Punitive damages

Law Reporter, Nov 2004

King v. Stanford Univ., Cal., Santa Clara County Super. Ct., No. CV804693, Apr. 9, 2004.

King, 46, was employed at a university, where she allegedly suffered through years of gender discrimination. She filed a grievance against her employer with the state department of fair employment and eventually resigned to take a job elsewhere. As part of her new job, she had to use the laboratories at the university, but the school refused to let her use the facilities and then set unreasonable conditions for her using them. She was allegedly terminated from her new job because she could not adequately use the university's laboratory. She suffered depression, requiring therapy and medication. Her past medical expenses were about $6,600, and her future medical expenses are estimated at $7,900. As a research technician, King was earning $80,000 annually. She has been unable to return to work. Her past lost wages were about $185,900, and her future lost wages are estimated at $333,400.

King sued the university, alleging malice, fraud or oppression, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff alleged defendant restricted her use of the lab in retaliation for her previous gender discrimination allegations. Plaintiff also contended that defendant intentionally interfered with her contractual relationship with her new employer.

Defendant contended the restrictions were in place before plaintiff resigned and that it placed the restrictions after plaintiff yelled at her supervisors during a meeting. Defendant further alleged plaintiff would have been laid off from her new job anyway.

A jury found for plaintiff on all but the emotional distress claims and awarded her about $1.02 million, including about $625,000 in punitive damages.

Plaintiff's experts were Jan Duffy, human resources policies, San Francisco, Cal.; Diana S. Everstine, psychology/counseling, San Jose, Cal.; and T. John Whalen, economics, Saratoga, Cal.

Defendant's experts in this case were Margo M. Leahy, psychiatry, San Francisco, Cal.; Kevin Sweeney, mitigation of damages, San Jose, Cal.; and Phillip McLeod, economics, Emeryville, Cal.

Plaintiff's Counsel

* Robert H. Bohn, San Jose, Cal.