Del. Judge Wipes Out $1.5M Verdict, Orders New Trial in Breastfeeding Discrimination Case
A Delaware federal judge has ordered a new trial in the case of a woman who was awarded $1.5 million in punitive damages for claims that she had been demoted for using a breast pump at work.
June 04, 2019 at 05:29 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Law Weekly
A Delaware federal judge has ordered a new trial in the case of a woman who was awarded $1.5 million in punitive damages for claims that she had been demoted for using a breast pump at work.
U.S. District Judge Colm F. Connolly of the District of Delaware blamed attorneys for plaintiff Autumn Lampkins for conflating separate claims of disparate treatment and hostile work environment in a way that “undoubtedly confused the jury.” Attorneys for defendant Mitra QSR KNE, which operates Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurants in Delaware, had contributed to the confusion by largely going along with the gambit until it was too late, he said.
The result, Connolly ruled, was an unreasonable finding in February by a Wilmington jury, which ruled in favor of Lampkins on all six counts of her discrimination suit and awarded her $1.5 million in punitive damages, plus another $25,000 in compensatory damages.
“Having concluded that the jury's findings in favor of Lampkins' hostile work environment claims were unreasonable and should be overturned, I believe that it would be a miscarriage of justice to allow the jury's disparate treatment findings to stand, as I think the jury was confused by the various and conflated theories of liability presented both explicitly and implicitly by Lampkins at trial,” Connolly wrote in a 38-page memorandum opinion.
According to the opinion, Lampkins had recently given birth when she was hired as an assistant manager making $10.50 per hour at a dual brand KFC and Taco Bell restaurant in Camden.
Lampkins cited 14 instances of ”severe or pervasive discriminatory harassment” she allegedly suffered because she had been lactating, including management complaints and two separate instances of male employees walking in on her while she was pumping in an office. In one instance, she said, a male worker “peeped” into the room and made “squeezing hand gestures” in a joke to other staff members.
Employees complained about frequent breaks Lampkins took for pumping, and some even threatened to quit, court papers said. Lampkins was demoted to shift manager at a Dover location and her pay was cut from $10.50 to $10 per hour.
But Connolly ruled Tuesday that all of those instances, viewed in their totality, could not sustain the jury's finding that she had been subjected to a hostile work environment. In his opinion, Connolly said that none of the cited behavior involved derogatory statements or were threatening, hostile or abusive in nature.
“Viewed in the light most favorable to Lampkins, the circumstances identified by Lampkins establish that she had an unpleasant relationship with her coworkers, and that her coworkers resented her for taking so many breaks to pump,” Connolly wrote.
At trial, Connolly said, Lampkins' Jacobs & Crumplar attorneys placed too much emphasis on the breast-pumping accommodations available there, making it the dispositive issue for the jury. However, that Title VII, which Lampkins cited as the basis for her hostile work environment claims, was “not an accommodations statute,” and could not be used to reach a remedy, he said.
Attorneys for both sides did not return calls Tuesday afternoon seeking comment on the ruling.
Lampkins is represented by Patrick C. Gallagher and Raeann Warner of Jacobs & Crumplar in Wilmington.
Mitra is represented by Jo Bennett and Samantha Banks of Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis in Philadelphia and Richard A. Barkasy and Daniel M. Pereira from the firm's Wilmington office.
The case is captioned Lampkins v. Mitra.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLawsuit Against Major Food Brands Could Be Sign of Emerging Litigation Over Processed Foods
3 minute readPoop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
4 minute readNLJ 500 Firm Seeks 20-Day Extension for Restaurant Client's Injunction Compliance
Willkie Farr & Gallagher Drives Legal Challenge for Uber Against State's Rideshare Laws
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Navigating AI Risks: Best Practices for Compliance and Security
- 220 New Judges? Connecticut Could Get Wave of Jurists
- 3Orrick Loses 10-Lawyer Team to Herbert Smith in Germany
- 4‘The US Market Is Critical’: KPMG’s Former Head of Global Legal Services On the Legal Arm of the Big Four Firm Entering the US
- 5Justice Marguerite Grays Elevated to Co-Chair Panel That Advises on Commercial Division
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250