Joan Gilbert sued her former employer, Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company (“MetLife”), for disability discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“MHRA”) after learning that she would be the only supervisor laid off when her office closed. Sadly, as the case progressed, Gilbert passed away from cancer. Her daughter Toni, as personal representative for her mother’s estate, petitioned the court to allow her to substitute as the plaintiff in the case. MetLife brought their own motion seeking dismissal of the whole case, claiming that a discrimination case does not survive the death of the claimant.
Under Minnesota law, a claim for injury to a person ordinarily expires when the person dies. However, where the injury was allegedly caused by the act or omission of another person (including a corporation), and the claimant thereafter dies from a cause unrelated to those injuries, courts will continue to hear a claim for “special damages” arising out of the injury. “Special damages” are those that can be ascertained in a precise, exact amount, such as back wages or medical expenses.
Federal District Court Judge John R. Tunheim ruled that Gilbert’s discrimination claim, which included demands for back pay, front pay and the monetary value of various employment benefits, were special damages that could survive Gilbert’s death.
MetLife argued that there were times when Gilbert could not work because of her disability and that without her testimony at trial, they would be unable to establish the precise amounts by which her back pay and benefit claims should be reduced during those periods. The judge responded, however, that Gilbert died after her deposition testimony had been taken. Thus, if there was a gap in MetLife’s information, it was caused by their own failure to inquire adequately about the issue. As a result, Gilbert’s daughter was allowed to step in as the substitute plaintiff to pursue her mother’s claims for special damages.
However, Judge Tunheim ruled that the claims for mental anguish damages were not easily quantifiable because they are personal and unique. Without the deceased employee’s testimony, the jury would be left to speculate on whether and to what extent she suffered from the type of humiliation and distress that is addressed through awards for mental anguish and suffering. Therefore, Judge Tunheim ruled that these damage claims did not survive Gilbert’s passing. Gilbert v. Metro. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., Civil No. 09-1990 (D. Minn. Oct. 7, 2011).