Eeoc V. Auto Zone

In 1996 John Shepherd reportedly injured his back which limited his ability for activities requiring physical exertion. Shepherd started work at Auto Zone from 1998 to 2003 until he was forced to take a medical leave of absence after experiencing a sharp pain from wringing out a mop. During his time of employment Shepherd sought the care of Dr. Katchen who declared that John Shepherd’s impairment required him to refrain from twisting his upper torso. Even so, Shepherd’s supervisor still mandated him to continue mopping which resulted in further injury.

In the case of EEOC v. AutoZone, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleged that AutoZone violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to accommodate the physical limitations of Shepherd, by terminating his employment with AutoZone, and lastly by discriminatorily denying him the opportunity to work after his medical leave of absence.

Compensatory damages are monetary awards for a plaintiff which are meant to compensate for injury, damages, or other incurred losses; they are awarded in court cases where a loss occurred resulting in unlawful conduct or negligence of another party. The court decided to award Shepherd $100,000 for “physical and emotional pain” even though AutoZone argued that that amount was excessive. The court upheld the award because the magistrate judge noted that the compensatory damages amount was approximately the same as with other cases; therefore, the amount cannot be labeled as “excessive”. Lastly there was a connection with the award and the evidence given by Shepherd, his wife, and by Dr. Katchen.

Punitive damages became a well-established part of civil law by 1850 and is defined as a “monetary compensation awarded to an injured party that goes beyond that which is necessary to compensate the individual for losses and that is intended to punish the wrongdoer.” The jury awarded $500,000 in punitive damages then the judge reduced the amount to $200,000