JEFFERSON CITY — The Missouri Supreme Court will hear an appeal in a workplace retaliation case after the Missouri Highways and Transportation Commission (MHTC) challenged a lower court ruling that awarded a former employee substantial damages under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA).
The Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District, ruled that it lacked jurisdiction over the case and transferred it to the state's highest court, citing constitutional challenges raised by the plaintiff, Kevin Rhodes, according to a Feb. 11 opinion.
Rhodes, a former MHTC employee, successfully sued for hostile work environment and retaliation, receiving a jury award that included $1.7 million in punitive damages.
However, the circuit court reduced the total award to $500,000 in accordance with a statutory damages cap, which Rhodes contends is unconstitutional.
MHTC sought to overturn the jury’s verdict, filing a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) or, alternatively, for a new trial.
The commission argued that Rhodes failed to present sufficient evidence to support his claims of retaliation and a hostile work environment.
The case also challenged the jury's finding of punitive damages, asserting that Rhodes had not demonstrated that MHTC’s conduct was sufficiently egregious to warrant such an award.
MHTC claimed that the jury was misdirected by an erroneous instruction regarding what constitutes an adverse employment action in a retaliation claim.
The commission also objected to the court’s refusal to allocate specific amounts to each category of damages, arguing that this left the judgment vague and prevented the proper application of Missouri’s statutory limits on punitive damages.
Rhodes filed a cross-appeal challenging the constitutionality of Missouri's statutory cap on damages under the MHRA.
He argued that the cap violates multiple provisions of the Missouri Constitution, including his right to a jury trial, the separation of powers doctrine, and the equal protection and due process clauses.
Specifically, Rhodes contended that statutory damage caps undermine the jury’s role in assessing damages, an issue previously considered by Missouri courts in cases involving common law claims.
He also argued that the MHRA claims he brought are analogous to causes of action that existed in 1820 when Missouri's Constitution first guaranteed the right to a jury trial, making the cap unconstitutional.
Given the constitutional questions at the heart of Rhodes’s cross-appeal, the Court of Appeals ruled that the case must be heard by the Missouri Supreme Court, which has exclusive jurisdiction over challenges to the validity of state statutes.
Both parties agreed that the Supreme Court should review the constitutional arguments regarding the damages cap, though Rhodes contended that the appeals court could still address MHTC’s other claims.
The appellate court, however, determined that all aspects of the appeal should be transferred together, noting that resolving the constitutional issue could significantly impact the case's outcome.
In its ruling, the court cited previous Missouri Supreme Court decisions that established the principle that statutory damage caps may violate the right to a jury trial in certain cases.
Christina Nielsen in Arlington, Va.; David Lunceford and Victoria Arends in Lee’s Summit; and Eric Playter of Raytown represented the appellant-respondent.
Carrie McAtee, Alicia O’Connell and Michael Polwort in Jefferson City; and Taylor Markway in Kansas City represented the respondent-appellant.
Attorneys did not respond to requests for comment before publication.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District case number: WD86331