The Multiple Laws Applicable to Discrimination Cases

Bob Gregg | 06.04.26

There are more employment laws than in almost any other area of compliance and litigation. Just one employment action, such as a termination, can trigger a cascade in which the employee brings charges of unfair discharge, wage and hour violations, OSHA violations, discrimination, and various state law claims – all in the same suit. Each of these laws can have very different damage awards, different timeframes for suit, different remedies, and be enforced by different agencies. So “just” one case can have multiple effects on damages, multiplying the damages award.

When employees fight back, they often unleash ALL the issues that have stacked up

$10.6 million verdict smells sweet to “perfume victim” - failure to solve a simple problem unleashes a flood! This multiple cause of action situation started when a country western radio station consistently refused to reasonably accommodate the allergic disability of a female DJ to the perfume worn by another employee (even after the station’s own doctor confirmed the seriousness of the allergies, which caused months of medical leave). The station would neither require the other person to stop wearing perfume nor grant the DJ’s request to transfer to a different time slot to escape close work with the other person. The DJ filed an ADA case. Then, once she had started, the DJ decided to add other causes of action under the Michigan Handicap Act, Michigan Civil Rights Act, Equal Pay Act, Title VII (sex discrimination and retaliation), and the FMLA. A jury found violations of disability, retaliation, sex, and pay discrimination. (She was a national award winner and drew more revenue for the station than less renowned men, who were paid more.) The jury found “malice or reckless indifference” by the employer. Weber v. Infinity Broadcasting Corp. (E.D. Mich., 2005). Though there are damage award “caps” in federal law, they can apply to each cause of action separately and do not “cap” front pay or attorney fees, so multiple causes of action can stack up the damages. In this case, it seems the employer might have been able to avoid the whole mess if it had paid better attention to the original perfume issue. Another message is that an employer that is insensitive to its workers’ concerns has probably made other transgressions as well. When something finally “triggers” a suit, then all the other issues surface.

Khatahi v. Car Holdings, LLC (11th Cir, 2026) is a sex and harassment case filed under both Title VII and Florida state law. A female salesperson at a car dealership was subjected to verbal and physical harassment, told to use her sex and appearance to sell cars, and to unwanted touching. She quit and brought suit. A jury awarded $81,000 in compensatory damages and $750,000 in punitive damages. The company moved the court to reduce the award, arguing that Title VII caps damages at $50,000 for a company of under 100 employees ($300,000 for larger employers) and Florida caps punitive damages at $100,000. So, the $100,000 should be the maximum award. The court ruled that, though Title VII has a cap, the Florida law also allows greater compensatory damages, and thus it could be used to keep the full $81,000 award. It did cap the punitive at $100,000 for a total of $181,000. On appeal, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals first ruled that the company had failed to assert the affirmative defense of the $50,000 damage cap in its earlier pleadings. So it had waived the defense and was subject to the full $300,000 Title VII damages. Then the Court ruled that the successful plaintiff was not limited to having to take damages under the one law that had the higher damages limit. Instead, the Court could “stack” both laws and award the punitive maximum allowed under each. It could award both the full $100,000 under the Florida law and the $300,000 under Title VII, for a combined $400,000, plus the $81,000 compensatory damages. The lesson is that one situation can trigger several laws, and cases that allege violation of multiple laws can multiply the damages.

Discrimination claims are among the most common employment cases

Both of the above cases started with discrimination, but then grew to include more. Employers tend to think of Equal Employment Opportunity cases and damages in terms of the “Big Three” EEO laws: Title VII, Americans with Disabilities Act, and Age Discrimination in Employment Act. However, that is far too narrow. There are several more laws covering each type of protected activity, and often an individual employee can fit within two or more protected statuses. Each law has its own different time frames, procedures, remedies, and damages. So just the one area of discrimination law can become quite complex. A list of EEO Status Laws is below.

EEO Status Laws

Conclusion

Just one discrimination case on just one protected status issue can include allegations of violation of several laws. Each with its own separate remedies and damages. We encourage employers with questions to reach out to a member of Boardman Clark’s Labor & Employment Law Practice Group.