CourtCases2010

The trial court ruled as a matter of law that natson

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: 60.10. 255 Issue whether female former employee who reported incidents of sexual harassment by male supervisor to female co-supervisor complied with employer's sexual harassment policy, and therefore, whether employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventative or corrective opportunities provided in policy, as affirmative defense to employee's sexual harassment claim, was question for jury, in view of evidence that employer's official Policies and Procedures Manual which required employee to report incidents of sexual harassment to wrongdoer's supervisor or human resources was not distributed to employees, that another policy distributed to employees provided that employee could report such incident to manager or "any supervisor with whom they [felt] comfortable," and that supervisor failed to immediately failed to notify human resources as required by latter policy. West's F.S.A. § 760.10. *946 Stanley Kiszkiel of Stanley Kiszkiel, P.A., Pembroke Pines, for appellant. Susan L. Dolin of Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Dolin & Pancier, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee. WARNER, J. Appellant, Shirail Natson, appeals a directed verdict in favor of Eckerd Corporation on her claim for sexual harassment in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act, section 760.10, Florida Statutes (2002). The court granted a directed verdict based upon Eckerd's affirmative defense that it exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct sexual harassment and that Natson unreasonably failed to take advantage of preventative opportunities. We hold that the court erred in directing a verdict because the evidence taken in a light most favorable to Natson would defeat the affirmative defense. We therefore reverse. Natson was employed as a photo lab technician for an Eckerd Store. Her regular supervisor was Maxime Nicolas, but Jennifer Woods was Nicolas's co-supervisor of the photo lab. In the joint pre-trial stipulation, Eckerd admitted that Woods was a supervisor. Howard Young was the overall photo lab manager and was the supervisor of both Nicolas and Woods. About a month after Natson began working at Eckerd, Nicolas started touching her inappropriately. Natson told him to keep his hands to hi...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online