After a three-day trial in federal court, a jury issued a mixed verdict in a former Allentown employee’s discrimination lawsuit against the city, leading both sides to declare victory.
According to court documents, a jury found the city not liable in the firing of former human resources generalist Karen Ocasio, after demonstrating a “legitimate, non-retaliatory reason” for her firing.
However, jurors also said they believed Ocasio’s termination was connected to her filing of discrimination complaints, and that she “has proven by a preponderance of evidence that there is a ‘but for’ causal connection between the materially adverse action (termination) and the protected activity (complaints of discrimination).”
The mixed verdict has led to different interpretations among the two parties, both of which are declaring themselves the victor in the lawsuit.
“A jury found the City not liable in the discrimination case, determining that the City had a legitimate reason for the employee’s termination and that the City did not retaliate against the employee,” Allentown spokesperson Chelsea Koerbler said in a written statement. “The City remains committed to ensuring that Allentown is a welcoming and respectful place to work, where every employee feels valued and supported.”
However, Marc Weinstein, Ocasio’s lawyer, said in an interview Thursday with The Morning Call, “We declare ourselves the winner.”
Regardless of the other two findings, the jury found that there was a causal connection between Ocasio’s complaints of discrimination and her termination, meaning that the city violated laws related to retaliation and protected workplace activity, Weinstein argued.
“The jury also found that there were other reasons for letting her go too,” Weinstein said. “But under the law, if you show retaliation, which we did, we win.”
In her lawsuit, Ocasio claimed she exhausted her avenues to report and remedy the alleged discrimination she faced, which included being denied proper training and assistance in a new position and facing racist remarks from her coworkers.
The city in July filed a motion for summary judgment, claiming Ocasio lacked evidence that her firing was retaliatory and asking the judge to rule in the city’s favor. Lawyers David MacMain and Tricia Ambrose, whose firm the city hired to handle the case, argued that Allentown had legitimate reasons to fire Ocasio that were unrelated to her discrimination complaints.
Federal Judge Joseph F. Leeson denied the city’s motion, finding that there were remaining “material disputes of fact” that could only be addressed via a jury trial.
The trial took place Monday through Wednesday and the jury issued its findings on the final day.
Weinstein said he has asked Leeson to “respect the jury’s determination and declare her the winner.” He filed a notice in court Thursday asking for a Monday deadline to file additional arguments as to why the court should rule officially in Ocasio’s favor.
He also called on Allentown City Council to issue a resolution declaring that Ocasio was discriminated against and that she is entitled to damages from the city.
Ocasio is one of five current and former employees who have accused Allentown of illegal and discriminatory actions in a federal lawsuit.
Tatiana Tooley, former human relations officer; Tawanna Whitehead, deputy city clerk; John Ferry, former risk and safety manager; and Nadeem Shahzad, former human resources director, also filed lawsuits claiming they faced illegal discrimination or retaliation while employed by the city. Whitehead’s lawsuits was dismissed; the other three lawsuits are ongoing.
Reporter Lindsay Weber can be reached at Liweber@mcall.com.