This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: ective, steel-lined gloves; (2) using an individual set of knives and other
utensils; and (3) enhanced clean-up procedures.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The issue of damages was tried to a jury, which awarded Sharp $ 10,000 in compensatory
damages and $ 45,000 in punitive damages. The district court also ordered reinstatement
of Sharp to his former position in the produce department along with back pay and,
pending reinstatement, [**12] payment of Sharp's usual wages of $ 192.50 per week.
Prevo's posted $ 100,000 supersedeas bond, and the district court approved a stay of the
monetary damages judgment but did not stay the order of reinstatement. Prevo's filed a
Motion for Stay of Reinstatement Order Pending Appeal, which we granted in March of
We find the medical examination of an alleged HIV positive employee, in the unique
circumstances of this particular case, to be job-related and consistent with a business
necessity. As such, we do not reach a determination of punitive damages, though it
appears that the employer's behavior in this instance was not sufficiently unreasonable or
malicious to justify an award of punitive damages in any event.
III. Standard of Review
This court reviews the district court's grant of summary judgment de novo. Brooks v.
American Broadcasting Cos., 932 F.2d 495, 500 (6th Cir. 1991). Summary judgment is
proper if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled
to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). The party moving for summary
judgment bears the burden of demonstrating that there is an absence of evidence to
[**13] support the nonmoving party's case. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 325,
91 L. Ed. 2d 265, 106 S. Ct. 2548 (1986). Viewing the evidence in the light most
favorable to the nonmoving party, the court must determine whether the evidence
presents a sufficient disagreement to require submission to the factfinder or whether it is
so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,
Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 251-52, 91 L. Ed. 2d 202, 106 S. Ct. 2505 (1986).
IV. Discussion of Liability
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.
- Spring '08