Alvarado v Cajun Operating Company
Filed December 11, 2009
Cite as 08-15549

Punitive and Compensatory Damages not Given under ADA

Tannislado Alvarado (Alvarado) was employed at Church’s Chicken (Church’s) to perform maintenance work. Eventually, Alvarado became a cook. According to job evaluations, Alvarado performed satisfactorily as assessed by store manager Jesus Tapia and his successor in interest, Tina Montague (Montague).

When Montague made inappropriate comments about his age, Alvarado called Church’s hotline to complain about it. Montague denied making such comments. Subsequently, Alvarado received his first performance Counseling Record (counseling record) and four more counseling records over the period of nine months.

Consequently, Alvarado called the hotline the second time to report on the retaliation. He even reported the pain in his hands when he worked on the walk-in refrigerator. Montague referred him to Dr. Robert Johnson who noted that Alvarado only suffered from arthritis common to his age and cleared him to return to work.

When Alvarado was terminated, he filed an employment discrimination suit against Cajun Operating Co. (Cajun) in violation of Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The district court granted Cajun’s motion in limine barring Alvarado from seeking punitive and compensatory damages for his retaliation suit.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in affirming the district court’s judgment, ruled that the district court did not err in granting Cajun’s motion in limine barring Alvarado from seeking punitive and compensatory damages under the ADA because retaliation was not among those specific claims listed that entitled one from such damages.

Moreover, the district court did not err in holding that Alvarado was not entitled to a jury trial on his retaliation claims because such claims were limited only to equitable relief.