Only Limited, Equitable Relief Available to Employees Claiming
Retaliation Under the ADA

In a case of first impression among the federal circuits, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has held that neither compensatory nor punitive damages are available to an employee bringing a retaliation claim pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The case is Kramer v. Banc of America Securities, which issued on January 20, 2004. In reaching this holding, the court examined a section of the ADA which provides that the remedies available for violations of that statute are those provided under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the major federal law prohibiting employment discrimination). The court noted in particular that 42 USC Section 2000e-5(g)(1) of Title VII provides for certain equitable relief (including, but not limited to, back pay), but does not provide for compensatory or punitive damages. Although Title VII was amended in 1991 to provide for expanded remedies that included compensatory and punitive damages in certain circumstances, those additional remedies, as applied to claims brought under the ADA, were limited to violations of ADA Sections 102, which prohibits an employer from intentionally discriminating against persons with a disability, and 102(b)(5), which prohibits an employer from failing to reasonably accommodate an otherwise qualified person with a disability. Since ADA retaliation claims are not brought pursuant to either of those sections, the court concluded that the amendments established by the 1991 Civil Rights Act “[do] not expand the remedies available to a party bringing an ADA retaliation claim against an employer and therefore compensatory and punitive damages are not available.”

The court also concluded that, since the only remedies available under the ADA’s anti-retaliation provision are equitable in nature, employees asserting ADA retaliation claims have no right to a jury trial.

This case represents a split among the federal courts, who are divided over the issue of whether compensatory and punitive damages are available remedies for ADA retaliation claims. In California, the case presumably will have little impact, because retaliation claims relating to alleged disability discrimination will more likely be pursued under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, which recognizes the full range of damage remedies, including punitive damages.