As was reported in our Winter 2004 newsletter, a jury awarded Gary S. Webber over 3 million dollars in his discrimination claim against International Paper (“IP”).  Now for the rest of the story:  a federal judge has overturned the jury’s decision and entered judgment in favor of International Paper.

Webber alleged that his dismissal, which occurred as part of a reduction in force, was motivated by disability discrimination animus.  In 1997, Webber suffered a knee injury at work.  He received an accommodation at work for this injury including leave time, modifications in his work schedule, and working from home.  IP also installed a “stairway lift chair” to assist Webber in getting to the engineering office.  Webber’s first- and second-line supervisors referred to this chair as the “Costanza chair” based upon an episode of the television sitcom “Seinfeld” where the character George Costanza fakes a disability.  Webber’s case went forward to a jury where it awarded him $3 million.  The trial judge later reduced the award to conform to statutory caps.

After the verdict, however, IP sought to have the judge overturn the jury decision or grant it a new trial.  The court agreed with IP and overturned the jury’s decision.  It held that there was insufficient evidence connecting the decision to eliminate Webber’s position with disability discrimination.  The court determined that no reasonable factfinder could have found that IP’s reason for terminating Webber was pretextual, and even if it was pretextual, no reasonable factfinder could have found that Webber’s disability motivated IP’s decision to terminate him.  IP proffered that its non-discriminatory reason for terminating Mr. Webber was a company-wide reduction in force, combined with his lack of an engineering degree.  The court’s analysis focused on whether a reasonable jury could have concluded that Gary Webber was included in the July 2001 reduction in force because of his disability.  After analyzing all the alleged discriminatory comments and other evidence, the court concluded that the “mixed bag of statements” about Webber's knees made over the course of his employment tenure at IP did not succeed in showing discriminatory animus.  In addition, Webber could not demonstrate with sufficient evidence that the individuals involved in the decision-making process to lay him off had discriminatory motives.

In sum, the court determined that Webber simply did not present sufficient evidence to allow a reasonable jury to find that the true reason for his dismissal was disability discrimination.  The court therefore overturned the jury’s decision.

Stay tuned for additional episodes as this saga continues.  Webber has the opportunity to appeal the Court’s decision with the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.