Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-86-02859/USCOURTS-ca10-86-02859-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Brown Disc Manufacturing, Inc
Appellee
Leo F. Kimminau
Appellant

Document Text:

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

JAN O 31989 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

LEO F. KIMMINAU, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v. 

BROWN DISC MANUFACTURING, INC., 

a Colorado corporation, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT 

No. 86-2859 

(Dist. of Colorado) 

(D.C. No. 85-Z-8) 

Before LOGAN, BARRETT, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

Kimminau appeals from a grant of summary judgment entered in 

favor of Brown Disc Manufacturing, Inc. (Brown Disc) dismissing 

his claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 

u.s.c. § 2000(e), et seq.; the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 u.s C. 

§ 1981; the Age Discrimination Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621, et 

and the Equal Pay Act of 1963, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d). The 

district court's order, which incorporated its oral findings of 

fact and conclusions of law, granted summary judgment based on 

Giandonato v. Sybron Corp., 804 F.2d 120 (10th Cir. 1986). We 

affirm. 

The district court found, and we agree, that Giandonato, id., 

i s dispositive of Kimminau's claims under Title VII, § 1981 and 

ADEA. We held in that case that under Ford Motor Company v. EEOC, 

458 U.S. 219 (1982) "an employee is obligated to minimize his 

damages by accepting his employer's offer of reinstatement to his 

Appellate Case: 86-2859 Document: 01019961752 Date Filed: 01/03/1989 Page: 1 
previous job or a job that is 'substantially equivalent' to his 

previous job." Giandonato, 804 F.2d at 124. In the instant case, 

Brown Disc offered Kimminau unconditional reinstatement at a 

higher salary. Kimminau's reasons for refusing the reinstatement 

offer are insufficient under Giandonato, supra. Kimminau argues 

that the legitimacy of Brown Disc's reinstatement was not a matter 

to properly dispose of by means of summary judgment. We disagree. 

The offer of reinstatement was unconditional. Kimminau has not 

presented any valid reasons for refusing to accept reinstatement. 

Giandonato, 804 F.2d at 124, 125. We have held that reinstatement 

is the preferred remedy. E.E.O.C. v. Prudential Federal Sav. and 

Loan Ass'n., 763 F.2d 1166, 1172 (10th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 

474 U.S. 946 (1985). 

The district court also correctly determined that Brown Disc 

presented legitimate nondiscriminatory reasons for any pay 

discrepancy between Kimminau and a female employee. Kimminau 

proffered nothing to rebut Brown Disc's showing, but merely rested 

on the pleadings. We therefore hold that the district court's 

grant of summary judgment as to the equal pay contention was also 

proper. 

We AFFIRM. 

-2-

Entered for the Court: 

James E. Barrett, 

Senior United States 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 86-2859 Document: 01019961752 Date Filed: 01/03/1989 Page: 2