10.4.4. FMLA Damages Liquidated Damages – No Instruction Comment Punitive damages cannot be recovered under the FMLA. 99 F. Zawadowicz v. CVS Corp., Supp.2d 518, 534 (D.N.J. 2000) (noting that nothing in the FMLA damages provision, 29 U.S.C. § 2617, authorizes an award of punitive damages); 329 F. Oby v. Baton Rouge Marriott, Supp.2d 772, 788 (M.D.La. 2004) (same). 29 U.S.C. § 2617 provides for a mandatory award of liquidated (double) damages for any award under the FMLA. No instruction is necessary on liquidated damages, however, because there is no issue for the jury to decide concerning the availability or amount of these damages. The court simply doubles the award of damages found by the jury. It should be noted that 29 U.S.C. § 2617 provides that if the defendant proves that its conduct was in good faith and that it had reasonable grounds for believing that the act or omission was not a violation of the FMLA, the may, in the discretion of the court, reduce “court the amount of the liability to” the amount of damages found by the jury. No instruction is necessary on good faith, either, because the question of good faith in this circumstance is a question for court.” The jury has no authority to reduce an award of liquidated damages “the under the FMLA. 99 F. Supp.2d 518, 534 (D.N.J. 2000) (noting that Zawadowicz v. CVS Corp., any question of reducing liquidated damages is for the court). Eighth Circuit Civil Compare Instruction 5.86 (providing an instruction on the good faith defense to liquidated damages).
10.4.4. FMLA Damages – Liquidated Damages No Instruction Comment Punitive damages cannot be recovered under the FMLA. Zawadowicz v. CVS Corp., 99 F. Supp.2d 518, 534 (D.N.J. 2000) (noting that nothing in the FMLA damages provision, 29 U.S.C. § 2617, authorizes an award of punitive damages); Oby v. Baton Rouge Marriott, 329 F. Supp.2d 772, 788 (M.D.La. 2004) (same). 29 U.S.C. § 2617 provides for a mandatory award of liquidated (double) damages for any award under the FMLA. No instruction is necessary on liquidated damages, however, because there is no issue for the jury to decide concerning the availability or amount of these damages. The court simply doubles the award of damages found by the jury. It should be noted that 29 U.S.C. § 2617 provides that if the defendant proves that its conduct was in good faith and that it had reasonable grounds for believing that the act or omission was not a violation of the FMLA, the “court may, in the discretion of the court, reduce the amount of the liability to” the amount of damages found by the jury. No instruction is necessary on good faith, either, because the question of good faith in this circumstance is a question for “the court.” The jury has no authority to reduce an award of liquidated damages under the FMLA. Zawadowicz v. CVS Corp., 99 F. Supp.2d 518, 534 (D.N.J. 2000) (noting that any question of reducing liquidated damages is for the court). Compare Eighth Circuit Civil Instruction 5.86 (providing an instruction on the good faith defense to liquidated damages).
10_Chap_10_2014_spring.docx