|
Robert F.
McBrayer, et. al. And Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission
v.s.
City of Marietta
United States District Court, Northern District of
Georgia, Atlanta Division Civil Action Nos.
1:85-CV-4731-HTW and 1:86-CV-1798-HTW
Liability Facts: Six individual plaintiffs filed
this action under the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act seeking to correct unlawful
employment practices on the basis of age and to
recover past and future wage and pension benefit
losses resulting therefrom. Plaintiff E.E.O.C.
joined this action and sought relief on behalf of an
affected class of all persons employed by the City
of Marietta as police officers who wished to remain
employed beyond the age of 55. The plaintiffs
alleged that the City of Marietta forced them
individually, upon attaining age 55, to retire from
their employment as police officers because of their
age. The plaintiffs further contended that mandatory
retirement age of 55 was not a reasonably necessary
qualification for the job of police officer, that
individuals aged 55 and older were capable of
performing duties associated with that job and that
testing for qualifications could be accomplished on
an individual basis. The City of Marietta contended
that it was immune from liability in that its
actions in forcing all police officers to
mandatorily retire at age 55 were taken in good
faith, conformity with and reliance upon an
administrative order, ruling and approval of the
E.E.O.C. The city further contended that some of the
plaintiffs claims were barred by the statute of
limitations and laches and that due to the passage
of time the plaintiffs had waived their rights to
complain of the city’s action. They city was
successful in barring four of the plaintiffs’ claims
on these grounds. The city also contended that age
55, in and of itself constituted a Bonafide
Occupational Qualification Test under which a fair
evaluation of a police officer’s ability to safely
and effectively perform his job could be made. The
jury’s verdict in favor of plaintiffs Robert F.
McBrayer, William C. Haberland and Harold P. Craft
was based upon an award of past and future wage and
pension benefit losses, plus interest. The jury
found that the city violated the rigts of Craft
willfully, thereby authorizing an award of
liquidated damages.
Expert Witnesses for Plaintiffs: Dr. David B. Pryor,
M.D., Cardiologist; Dr. Bryant Stamford, Ph.D.,
Physiologist; Dr. Richard J. Cebula, Ph.D.,
Economist.
Expert Witnesses for Defendant: Dr. Alexander Lind,
Ph.D., Physiologist; Albert M. Antlitz, M.D.,
Cardiologist.
Settlement: Jury verdict for $742,589.00.
Attorneys:
E.E.O.C. represented by Maureen G. Malone and Cheryl
P. Smith, Atlanta.
Defendant represented by Lynn A. Downey and Joseph
C. Parker, Marietta.
| |
|
 |
| |
|
|
