JUDITH CARRIE RUSAK VS. RYAN AUTOMOTIVE, L.L.C., ET
AL.
A-2002-09T1 02-08-11
Plaintiff's complaint alleged violations of the LAD and the
common law tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress.
At the close of the plaintiff's case, and at the end of the
case, the trial judge rejected defendants' motions to dismiss
plaintiff's punitive damages claim. The jury found for
plaintiff on her LAD claims and awarded her compensatory damages
for back pay. It rejected, however, he claim for LAD emotional
distress damages.
As to plaintiff's common law tort claim, the jury
interrogatory asked: "Did the acts of the [d]efendants
constitute such willful, wanton and reckless conduct that you
find for [plaintiff] on the legal theory of intentional
infliction of emotional distress as defined by the Court?" The
jury answered no.
After receipt of the verdict, the judge dismissed the jury.
Plaintiff objected, arguing that the punitive damages phase
should commence. The judge disagreed, concluding that the
jury's answer to the above-cited interrogatory, and its
rejection of plaintiff's LAD emotional distress claim, meant
that the jury found that defendants' conduct did not support an
award under the Punitive Damages Act.
We reversed, concluding that the judge's interpretation of
the jury's response to the interrogatory was error, and that
defendants' conduct, viewed in a light most favorable to
plaintiff, supported an award of punitive damages under the LAD.
We also provided guidance as to what instructions should be
provided to a second jury if the matter is tried again.
