.floatimg-left-hort { float:left; } .floatimg-left-caption-hort { float:left; margin-bottom:10px; width:300px; margin-right:10px; clear:left;} .floatimg-left-vert { float:left; margin-top:10px; margin-right:15px; width:200px;} .floatimg-left-caption-vert { float:left; margin-right:10px; margin-bottom:10px; font-size: 12px; width:200px;} .floatimg-right-hort { float:right; margin-top:10px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 300px;} .floatimg-right-caption-hort { float:left; margin-right:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 300px; font-size: 12px; } .floatimg-right-vert { float:right; margin-top:10px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 200px;} .floatimg-right-caption-vert { float:left; margin-right:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 200px; font-size: 12px; } .floatimgright-sidebar { float:right; margin-top:10px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 200px; border-top-style: double; border-top-color: black; border-bottom-style: double; border-bottom-color: black;} .floatimgright-sidebar p { line-height: 115%; text-indent: 10px; } .floatimgright-sidebar h4 { font-variant:small-caps; } .pullquote { float:right; margin-top:10px; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px; width: 150px; background: url(http://www.dmbusinessdaily.com/DAILY/editorial/extras/closequote.gif) no-repeat bottom right !important ; line-height: 150%; font-size: 125%; border-top: 1px solid; border-bottom: 1px solid;} .floatvidleft { float:left; margin-bottom:10px; width:325px; margin-right:10px; clear:left;} .floatvidright { float:right; margin-bottom:10px; width:325px; margin-right:10px; clear:left;}
A court case that began in Polk County may provide a new standard for juries across the country to consider in age discrimination cases. The U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month agreed to review Gross vs. FBL Financial Services Inc., in which an employee of FBL claimed he was demoted because of his age.

Jack Gross, who had been reassigned by FBL to be a claims administration manager after having worked as a claims administration vice president and director, filed the suit in April 2004, claiming that the company had violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act by demoting him.

The Supreme Court will review whether the trial court erred in the instruction it gave to the jury about the evidence needed to determine whether age was a motivating factor in demoting Gross, who was in his mid-50s at the time. A prior Supreme Court decision in 1989 and Congress’ subsequent passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 have created ambiguity as to the level of evidence needed to prove discrimination.

“It would be a good case for a law school exam question,” said Russell Lovell, associate dean and professor at Drake University Law School. “It’s a pretty complex issue.” Because the 1991 act didn’t address age discrimination, the review is an opportunity for the court to clarify the standard, Lovell said.

During a five-day trial, the trial court used a so-called mixed-motive jury instruction, meaning that Gross had the burden to prove that age was FBL’s motivating factor in demoting him. However, if the company could prove that Gross would have been demoted regardless of his age, the jury was instructed that it should return a verdict in FBL’s favor. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Gross, awarding him lost compensation of nearly $47,000.

In an appeal to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, FBL argued in part that the trial court had erred in giving the mixed-motive instruction. The appeals court in May reversed the judgment and remanded the case for a new trial, holding that the mixed-motive jury instruction was not correct because it shifted the burden of persuasion on a central issue in the case.

As for the outcome that businesses would prefer, “I can see where employers might like to see uniformity,” Lovell said, “but in terms of liability, I suppose they would want to see the (8th Circuit Court’s) decision upheld.”

The Supreme Court is expected to hear oral arguments in March.