Judge Rules for ESPN on Most Claims in Discrimination Suit by Fired Associate Producer
A federal judge has largely ruled for ESPN in a case by a former associate producer who claimed she was fired because she was a woman, a minority and for using the Family and Medical Leave Act. The judge found for ESPN on most claims while finding for the employee on discrimination based on race, color and national origin.
October 26, 2018 at 04:17 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge has issued a mixed ruling on a lawsuit filed by a former ESPN associate producer who claimed the sports network discriminated against her because she is a woman and retaliated against her for taking advantage of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act.
In his ruling handed down Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Michael Shea of Connecticut dismissed most of the claims leveled by Rachel Pineda in a February lawsuit. The judge dismissed her FMLA claim and her Title VII claim related to sex discrimination, the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans With Disabilities Act. Shea said Pineda's claim for discrimination based on race, color and national origin may proceed.
Pineda, a Terryville resident, filed several claims against ESPN and management saying she wasn't treated properly and, in many cases, not talked to with respect. Pineda was seeking $2.5 million in damages, $100,000 in lost wages and $200,000 for a college scholarship for her young son for “his pain and suffering and to compensate his father for my loss of income.”
Shea let stand the complaint related to discrimination based on race, noting Pineda, who is Hispanic, was allegedly told by a manager she should “go to Deportes,” which is the network's Spanish-speaking network. That comment, the judge wrote, “could be read to suggest hostility to Hispanic employees by suggesting they work for Spanish-speaking networks, and was directly connected to Pineda's performance during her probationary period.”
In her lawsuit, Pineda said she was fired in April 2016 “over the phone after being interrogated as to when I was coming in, when I explained that the phone meeting had been planned for over a month and I had already made child care and transportation arrangements for the day.” In her suit, Pineda said she was promised more substantial assignments by the network, but said, “I believe that I was lied to about what I was being asked to do at ESPN, and I believe I was retaliated against and wrongly terminated” based on ethnicity and gender, among other things.
Pineda claims management ridiculed her regarding her status as a single mother. In one case, she said, she was told by a human resources representative that breast-feeding mothers “needed to be watched, and that we should only be allowed to sign up for pre-scheduled 20-minute intervals in a private, locked, one-person booth. Otherwise we take up too much time and it can't be known what we are actually doing. [One defendant] also disapproved of my child being brought to the mother's room to be fed, [saying] that it should only be used for pumping, not feeding.”
Shea, though, said Pineda never states a specific Title VII claim for employment discrimination on the basis of sex. He said Pineda cannot show the breast-feeding comments had anything to do with her termination. Pineda did allege she had “rape-related” post-traumatic stress disorder, stemming from an assault on her when she was in college.
Shea wrote in his decision: “Although Pineda obliquely references PTSD symptoms and that certain actions by ESPN triggered her PTSD, she does not specify what symptoms she experienced and how those symptoms impacted her ability to perform her job as an associate producer.”
Shea also found Pineda was not able to prove retaliation related to her FMLA claim. The judge noted that plaintiff's performance review evaluation took place more than four months after her leave, and that she was fired nine months later.
Pineda, who acted as her own attorney, did not respond to a request for comment Friday.
Late Friday, Josh Krulewitz, ESPN's vice president of communications, told the Connecticut Law Tribune that the company would be declining comment.
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 AllEMT Qualifies as 'Health Care Provider' Under Whistleblower Act, State Appellate Court Rules
4 minute readInherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1From Hospital Bed to Legal Insights: Lessons in Life, Law, and Lawyering
- 2‘Diminishing Returns’: Is the Superstar Supreme Court Lawyer Overvalued?
- 3LinkedIn Accused of Sharing LinkedIn Learning Video Data With Meta
- 4Delaware Supreme Court Agrees Insurance Dispute Can Be Retried
- 5New Strategies For Estate, Legacy Planning
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