Cat's Paw Theory of Liability Does Not Exclude Award of Liquidated Damages as Penalty for FMLA Violation: Eighth Circuit | Practical Law

Cat's Paw Theory of Liability Does Not Exclude Award of Liquidated Damages as Penalty for FMLA Violation: Eighth Circuit | Practical Law

In Marez v. Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc., the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held, in part, that liquidated damages may be awarded in a Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) retaliation case premised on the cat's paw theory of liability.  

Cat's Paw Theory of Liability Does Not Exclude Award of Liquidated Damages as Penalty for FMLA Violation: Eighth Circuit

by PLC Labor & Employment
Published on 02 Aug 2012 • USA (National/Federal)
In Marez v. Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc., the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held, in part, that liquidated damages may be awarded in a Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) retaliation case premised on the cat's paw theory of liability.
On July 31, 2012, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued a decision in Marez v. Saint-Gobain Containers, Inc., holding, among other things, that liquidated damages may be awarded in an FMLA retaliation case premised on the cat's paw theory of liability.
Marez sued her former employer, Saint-Gobain, for unlawful termination, claiming Saint-Gobain retaliated against her for taking leave under the FMLA. A jury returned a verdict in Marez's favor on the FMLA claim. Marez was awarded:
  • Damages of $206,500.
  • An additional $206,500 in liquidated damages.
Saint-Gobain renewed its motion for judgment as a matter of law, which the district court denied. On appeal, the Eighth Circuit explained that Saint-Gobain's liability is premised on a cat's-paw theory of liability. As articulated by the US Supreme Court, "if a non-decisionmaker performs an act motivated by a discriminatory bias that is intended to cause, and that does proximately cause, an adverse employment action, then the employer has cat's-paw liability" (Staub v. Proctor Hosp., 131 S. Ct. 1186, 562 U.S. ___ (2011)).
The Eighth Circuit held that:
  • The district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding liquidated damages.
  • Saint-Gobain is liable for employment discrimination under the cat's-paw theory of liability.
The court reasoned that if it held otherwise and found that the cat's-paw theory applies to determining liability and lost wages, but not to liquidated damages, plaintiffs asserting the cat's paw theory would be treated "less favorably than those who do not" (citing Rasic v. City of Northlake, No. 08 C 104, (N.D. Ill. 2010)).
Court documents: