Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
Gibson v. Jetblue Airways Corp.
United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Orlando Division
July 16, 2019
LYNNE M. GIBSON, Plaintiff,
JETBLUE AIRWAYS CORP., Defendant.
B. SMITH United States Magistrate Judge.
case comes before the Court without a hearing on
Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Affirmative Defenses (Doc.
52). Defendant opposes the motion (Doc. 54).
Lynne M. Gibson, Ph.D. was hired by Defendant JetBlue Airways
Corp. to work as a Senior Analyst, Assessment and Evaluation,
working on the Assessment, Measurement, & Evaluation team
at JetBlue University (Doc. 1, ¶ 9). Plaintiff complains
that she was terminated on account of her age and race (Doc.
1). Defendant states that it fired Plaintiff because her
“'job performance was objectively inferior to every
other person on her team.'” (Id., ¶
34). Plaintiff is currently employed as an adjunct professor
at the University of Central Florida (Doc. 51 at 1; Doc. 53-1
Defendant answered the complaint it asserted the following
twelve affirmative defenses
First Affirmative Defense
Defendant asserts that it has made good-faith efforts to
prevent discrimination and harassment in the workplace, and
thus, cannot be liable for the decision of its agents, or for
punitive damages, to the extent the challenged employment
decisions were contrary to its efforts to comply with anti
discrimination and antiharassment statutes.
Second Affirmative Defense
To the extent that Defendant discovers evidence of wrongdoing
by Plaintiff, including Plaintiff's misrepresentations to
obtain leave and her improper retention of confidential and
proprietary information, Defendant hereby invokes the
after-acquired evidence rule to preclude an award of
reinstatement or front pay/back pay past the time at which
Defendant discovered the new evidence.
Third Affirmative Defense
Defendant asserts that Plaintiff's damages, if any, must
be reduced, in whole or in part, because of Plaintiff's
failure to mitigate damages, and further, that any interim
earnings or amounts earnable with due diligence by Plaintiff
reduces any entitlement to back pay. In addition, such sums
may also set-off and reduce other claims for damages alleged
Fourth Affirmative Defense
Defendant asserts that it is not liable for any alleged
wrongful actions taken by its employees that were taken
outside the scope and course of their duties and were not
authorized, condoned, or ratified by Defendant.
Fifth Affirmative Defense
Defendant avails itself of the same actor inference since the
same person both hired and discharged Plaintiff, knowing her
age and/or race.
Sixth Affirmative Defense
Defendant asserts that in the event of an adverse judgment,
Plaintiff is not entitled to recovery of multiple damages
based upon a ...
Buy This Entire Record For