However, Volvo contended that it had approved Arroyo’s military absences for years without issue. The company argued that her termination was instead due to repeated tardiness, which violated its attendance policy.
Initial Verdict Overturned; Second Jury Favors Volvo
In the initial 2016 trial, a jury sided with Arroyo on both her USERRA and ADA claims, awarding her substantial damages. However, Judge Dow later granted Volvo’s motion for judgment as a matter of law on the ADA claim, determining that the automaker consistently applied its attendance policy across all employees. He ordered a new trial for the USERRA claim, deeming the initial jury’s verdict “grossly excessive” and unsupported by sufficient evidence, especially since Arroyo had only sought $1 million in total damages.
The retrial concluded in February 2022, with jurors finding that Arroyo failed to prove her military service was a motivating factor in her termination. The Seventh Circuit subsequently affirmed this verdict, agreeing that Judge Dow acted within his discretion in ordering a new trial and dismissing the ADA claim.
Volvo Worker’s Military Bias Suit : Arroyo’s Petition to the Supreme Court
In her petition to the Supreme Court, Arroyo argued that the USERRA mandates employers to reemploy disabled veterans, regardless of their qualifications for their prior positions. She contended that the Seventh Circuit failed to apply this standard, asserting that if Volvo determined she could not perform her old job, it should have reassigned her to a comparable position with similar seniority, status, and pay.
