Skip to main content

Celia G. Zimmerman v. Direct Federal Credit Union and David Breslin

1st CircuitSeptember 4, 2001No. 01-1007Cited 116 times
Plaintiff WinDirect Federal Credit Union$730,000 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Selya, Gibson, Lipez
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
jury verdict

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

RetaliationDiscrimination

Outcome

Plaintiff Celia Zimmerman prevailed on her state-law retaliation claim and tortious interference claim, receiving $200,000 in compensatory damages and $400,000 in punitive damages for retaliation, plus $130,000 in compensatory damages for tortious interference. The court affirmed the jury verdict and denied the employer's post-trial motions.

What This Ruling Means

**Zimmerman v. Direct Federal Credit Union: Employment Dispute Summary** This case involved Celia Zimmerman, who filed an employment-related lawsuit against Direct Federal Credit Union and David Breslin in 2001. The specific details of what workplace issue triggered the dispute are not available from the court records provided. The court's final decision and reasoning are not detailed in the available information, making it difficult to determine how the case was resolved or what legal precedent it may have established. **What This Means for Workers:** Without knowing the specific claims, outcome, and court's reasoning, it's challenging to draw clear lessons for workers from this case. However, the fact that this case made it to the federal court system (First Circuit Court of Appeals) suggests it involved significant employment law issues that warranted judicial review. For workers facing employment disputes, this case serves as a reminder that various types of workplace conflicts can potentially be resolved through the court system when other remedies fail. Workers should document workplace issues carefully and consult with employment attorneys when they believe their rights have been violated, as some cases may have merit for legal action.

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

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.