-------------------------

Vadie v. Mississippi State University, 218 F.3d 365 (5th Cir. July 5, 2000)

Keywords: Title VII (national origin discrimination, failure to transfer; retaliation)

Introduction: Ahmad Vadie sued Mississippi State University (MSU) under Title VII for race discrimination, national origin discrimination and retaliation. A jury found in favor of Vadie. The Fifth Circuit affirms in part and vacates in part.

Facts: Vadie, who was born in Iran, was a tenured full professor in the Department of Petroleum Engineering. In 1993, MSU's Board decided to close the department effective 1995. MSU had a policy which permitted displaced faculty members to be considered for open faculty positions in other departments.

In 1993, three positions became available in the Department of Chemical Engineering. Vadie sought a position, but was not selected. On January 24, 1995, Vadie filed an EEOC charge alleging that he was not selected based on national origin and/or race. He filed suit in June of 1995.

In August of 1995, a faculty member died in the Department of Chemical Engineering. The Department decided to require that any replacement have a degree in chemical engineering. Since Vadie did not, he was excluded as a possible replacement. A Hispanic was hired for the position. On November 27, 1995, Vadie filed a second EEOC complaint alleging that he was not selected based on his national origin or in retaliation for having filed the first EEOC charge and the lawsuit.

Law:

1. 1993 vacancy

   1. This claim is time barred because Vadie did not file suit within 180 days of the challenged act. According to the Court, once Vadie knew that the third vacancy had been filled, he knew he would not receive one of the vacancies. Therefore, the clock began to run at that time and he did not file his EEOC charge within 180 days. Therefore, judgment should be entered for MSU on this claim.

2. 1995 vacancy - discrimination claim

   1. The Court finds that MSU was entitled to judgment as a matter of law because Vadie failed to present sufficient evidence that the reason for his non-selection was based on his national origin.

3. 1995 vacancy - retaliation claim

   1. The Court does find sufficient evidence to support the jury verdict on the retaliation claim.

   2. There was evidence that the faculty in the Department of Chemical Engineering was upset by the fact that Vadie had pursued a discrimination claim. Also, the requirement of a doctorate in chemical engineering may have been added just to exclude Vadie from the selection process. This was not a requirement during the 1993 selection process and in 1995, Vadie was the only person excluded from the search based upon this requirement. Also, at the time of trial, another position was open and there was no similar requirement.

4. Compensatory damages - emotional distress

   1. The jury awarded Vadie $350,000 for emotional distress. The district court reduced the award to $300,000 in order to come within the statutory cap.

   2. MSU argues that the award is excessive. The Fifth Circuit agrees. Vadie's evidence of emotional distress consisted solely of his own broad assertions of how he had been harmed. The Court holds that any award over $10,000 would be excessive. The Court vacates and remands for new trial (unless Vadie accepts a remittitur of $290,000 reducing the award to $10,000). At the new trial, Vadie may be able to introduce better evidence of his emotional distress.

5. Circuit Judge DeMoss concurs in part and dissents in part.

6. Click here to see actual case.