you need to enter appearance or if you already signed there's no no you need not do anything more than give us your argument thank you so good morning i came here to respectfully submit to you that the main issue in this case is in discrimination cases the relationship between economic damages things like lost wages and noneconomic damages compensation for emotional harm and my position that i would like to urge on the court is that there should be no relationship at all in other words if someone has very little in the way of economic damages lost wages and stuff but is the victim of discrimination they still could potentially have substantial emotional harm substantial compunction sation for such emotional harm not sure we would disagree with that but usually in such cases there is some thing to support the scope of the claim whether it's a need for medical treatment or psychological treatment or some some something besides the just general claim that it caused what the court sometimes called garden variety emotional distress what is there in this record that would help us well your honor to be clear getting into the specifics of this case my client's claim for compensatory damages is based on garden variety emotional disputes distress and it's his position that the range of damages available in the circuit for such claims gives him a reasonable probability just looking at his compensatory damages and ignoring punitive damages and attorney's fees exceeding the threshold for diversity jurisdiction and that's of course what this case is about of course the garden variety distress cases tend to be cases of for example racial discrimination here is it not the case that the violation is a procedural violation that is the employer would have been free without liability to say we just don't think this position is appropriate for someone who's an ex offenders that not right  well your honor in terms of discrimination versus what your honour's termed procedural violation i would respectfully submit that in terms of my client's compensatory damages  egregious the employer's conduct was really doesn't matter so if they engaged in a procedural violation a technical violation of the law and of course we were assuming that for the sake of argument here there's been no discovery in this case and my client suffers severe emotional harm as a result i would submit there's no reason he shouldn't why would we think there is severe emotional harm this is not quite the same thing as the insult of saying people like you don't belong can't be hired or to the extent that is what the employer thought that was lawful the problem is just that he was entitled to a hearing first i'm not sure if we've seen or you're to have notice and opportunity to contest in effect i don't know that i've seen cases of you know fifty thousand one hundred thousand dollars compensatory damages for the insult of not getting a hearing because a court could say well no these youthful indiscretions don't make him unfit to be the case under the fair chance act that the court can substantively review the balancing that the employer makes absolutely hundred percent and ari do you have any cases of emotional distress damages from violations of the fair chance act that we could look what i would say is that if someone says we don't want you or your kind around here because you're of your race or because you had some youthful indiscretion that resulted in a conviction that really has no bearing on the job either one is something that reasonably might make somebody pretty upset once thought of as one of the start of this invidious by society and the other may not be in quite that category but let me take you back to something i think  said to judge lynch and i want to make sure i understand it it was would have been possible for the proceeding to evolve rule the employer but that would have been titled him to compensation for the back pay and the gantry switch which are only a few thousand dollars i'm not sure i understand how the denial of that proceeding and the opportunity to get rescinded what was  a relatively modest amount of wage compensatory damages supports your claim of tens of thousands of dollars of emotional damages so help me out proceeding you mean if the employer had followed the procedures of the first chance act so if they'd follow those procedures if we're to believe them he would have gotten the job but not him not necessarily immediately so he would have had to have gotten back doing the work he would have been working on through and let me just add that he denies it was a seasonal job he says it was a permanent job yeah but they've got people got records that show that they only had someone in it for ten weeks so he can his statement is i don't think enough on that well he would be entitled to take discovery on that point if he is told that the job interview this is a permanent job and the employer later says no this never was a permanent job and it's hard it's hard to see how that issue could be resolved on a motion to dissolve it was eliminated after four weeks i mean that's part of the record the employer states ok so that's a different thing so if they're saying that it was a permanent job but in any event it was a limited in any event i still i'm having trouble understanding how how this supports a claim of extraordinary mental damages i guess a have nothing to say beyond that he had his job or send it and he was very upset about it here you're argument is that it's not a claim of extraordinary  emotional damage it's a claim of garden variety emotional distress and under our precedents that could such claims have been findings of damages north of seventy five thousand dollars have been upheld in cases of quote garden variety distress that's correct your honor and i what way do you does your complaint actually allege that he suffered damages in excess of seventy five thousand  dollars what the complaint says is that he seeks damages not to exceed one hundred thousand not to exceed that doesn't say my damages are more than seventy five thousand dollars that that would be entirely that allegation would be entirely consistent with damages of thirty cents well your honor i would ask you know i dressed that in my reply papers i would ask that the complaint be read liberally if someone had made that argument below it would have crossed moved to amend to say we're seeking one hundred thousand dollars it was just how it was phrased you know i would ask that either that be read liberally or that i mean there's also wondering here is does the presumption apply in a case where all that is said is let's even accept that it says damages of one hundred thousand dollars without any further specification as opposed to a complaint that says i had this much in lost wages i had this much in and asking for this much for emotional distress and so on with some specificity alleges the details of the emotional distress he suffered and again i would respectfully ask that the complaint be read liberally