Skip to main content

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Faurecia Exhaust Systems, Inc.

N.D. OhioSeptember 12, 2008No. Case 4:08CV00950Cited 5 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Sara Lioi
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss
State
Ohio

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Retaliation

Outcome

The court granted defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings, dismissing plaintiff's claims for compensatory and punitive damages in the ADA retaliation case and striking the jury demand. The court held that 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(a)(2) does not provide for compensatory or punitive damages on ADA retaliation claims under § 12203.

What This Ruling Means

This case involved a disability discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against Faurecia Exhaust Systems, a manufacturing company. The EEOC claimed that the company illegally retaliated against an employee under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and sought money damages for the worker. The court ruled in favor of Faurecia and dismissed the EEOC's claims for compensatory and punitive damages. The judge determined that federal law does not allow workers to collect monetary compensation for ADA retaliation claims. The court also struck down the request for a jury trial on the damages issue since no damages were available under the law. This ruling matters for workers because it limits what they can recover if they face retaliation for asserting their disability rights. While the ADA still protects workers from retaliation when they request accommodations or file discrimination complaints, this decision shows that in some jurisdictions, workers may not be able to collect money damages for retaliation itself. Workers who experience ADA retaliation may still have other legal remedies available, such as getting their job back or stopping the illegal behavior, but financial compensation might be more limited than in other types of workplace discrimination cases.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Retaliation cases

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.