CourtCases2010

The court agreed with the defendant as a matter of

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 's liquor store in Edgewater. Four months later, Chase injured her right leg and back when she slipped and fell on a mop in the rear of the store. Chase filed a claim with Walgreen's workers' compensation carrier. Chase missed work on an intermittent basis due to the injury. When her physicians cleared her for return to work, they placed her on bending and lifting restrictions. Approximately, [**2] one year later, Chase had a second work injury. While under a lifting restriction of twenty pounds or less, Chase's left leg gave way at work and she landed on her right hip and thigh. Chase again filed a claim for benefits. Again, almost one year later, Chase suffered a third work-related injury. Chase rose from a seated position to a standing position and injured her back. Chase filed another claim. Chase returned to work with some physical restrictions. Although still employed by Walgreen, Chase filed a one-count complaint on August 6, 1998, alleging that in violation of section 440.205, Florida Statutes (1993), she suffered retaliatory adverse employment action as a result of filing a valid worker's compensation claim. Chase claimed that since filing her first claim for workers' compensation benefits, Walgreen's management "adopted a pattern of retaliatory employment actions" which included: (1) failing to comply with physician ordered work restrictions; (2) reducing scheduled work hours resulting in decreased income and loss of eligibility for employee insurance and other benefits; (3) refusing Chase's request for transfer to another store located closer [**3] to her residence despite the open positions at that [*95] store; (4) making changes to Chase's work schedule without prior notice "in an effort to depict Chase as an absentee"; and (5) berating Chase in a "humiliating manner for pretextual violations of company policy or practice." Chase sought economic damages, including back pay and the value of any lost benefits with interest, and non-economic damages, including "damages for mental anguish, humiliati...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online