Appeals Court Overturns Decision in Wrongful Termination Lawsuit
When military veteran De’Ossie Dingus was fired from the Tennessee Highway Patrol in 2010, it was not because the 10-year veteran had been accused of misconduct or found guilty of a crime. It was because Major Kevin Taylor, a military liaison, came to the conclusion that Dingus was a potential terrorist after the two men briefly met in late 2009. Taylor, who was conducting a training class for troopers, showed a video on the radicalization of children, and Dingus complained because the purpose of the class was to focus on identifying weapons of mass destruction. At that point, Taylor went to Dingus’s superiors and stated his allegation that Dingus could be a terrorist, citing the fact that Dingus is a Sunni Muslim and saying that he was rude and caused problems both during the class and after it. Despite the fact that none of the other troopers in attendance ever supported Taylor’s claim and that most said they’d had no idea of Dingus’s religion because he never discussed it, his commanders fired him anyway.
It took Dingus three years of fighting to get his case through a civil court, where a hearing awarded him back pay and lost wages and his job. But he chose to take early retirement after the emotional and mental anguish of the accusation, the wrongful termination, and the court battle. He chose to sue for $300,000 in damages due to pain and suffering, but District Judge Tena Campbell awarded him only a symbolic $1, largely citing the fact that he didn’t go to a counselor or psychologist for help after his firing. Dingus and his lawyer, Arthur Knight III, were not the only ones shocked and dismayed by this decision; the 6th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ordered Campbell to reconsider, calling the $1 award “wholly inadequate” given the nature of the case.
As Knight said after the court overturned the decision, “”To be labeled a disloyal American who is capable of terroristic activities, I don’t know what amount of money (should be awarded) for that, but I think what (the appeals court) is saying is you need to come up with something.” He cited the fact that having to pay damages in wrongful termination suits such as this one can cause employers to think more carefully in similar situations in the future, and he stressed that Dingus should not be penalized for having what he called a “very strong constitution” and dealing with his pain without psychiatric care.
A new decision is pending.
