UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ) 

COMMISSION, ) CASE NO. 

 ) 

Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

v. ) COMPLAINT 

 ) AND JURY DEMAND 

THE KROGER COMPANY OF MICHIGAN, ) 

 ) 

 ) 

 Defendant ) 

 

NATURE OF THE ACTION

 This is an action under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 

1990 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment 

practices and to provide appropriate relief to Jarydith Mannella. As alleged with 

greater particularity in paragraph 8 below, the Commission alleges that 

Defendant, The Kroger Company of Michigan, violated the Americans with 

Disabilities Act when it failed to reasonably accommodate Mannella’s disability 

and terminated her employment because of her disability. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 

1337, 1343, and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to 

Section 107(a) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. 

§ 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title 

2:14-cv-13757-AJT-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 09/30/14 Pg 1 of 6 Pg ID 1
2 

VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3), 

and pursuant to Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a. 

2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within 

the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of 

Michigan, Southern Division. 

 PARTIES

3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the 

“Commission”), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the 

administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title I of the ADA and is 

expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 107(a) of the ADA, 42 

U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) of 

Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 

4. At all relevant times, Defendant The Kroger Company of Michigan (the 

“Employer”) has continuously been a Michigan corporation doing business in 

the State of Michigan and the City of Howell and has continuously had at least 

fifteen (15) employees. 

5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an 

employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce under Section 101(5) of 

the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(5) and Section 101(7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 

12111(7), which incorporates by reference Sections 701(g) and (h) of Title VII, 

42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(g) and (h). 

6. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has been a covered entity 

under Section 101(2) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2). 

2:14-cv-13757-AJT-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 09/30/14 Pg 2 of 6 Pg ID 2
3 

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

7. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Jarydith 

Mannella filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title I of the 

ADA by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this 

lawsuit have been fulfilled. 

8. On or about December 4, 2013, Defendant Employer engaged in 

unlawful employment practices in violation of Section 102(a) of the ADA, 42 

U.S.C. § 12112(a). 

a. Mannella is an individual with a disability. In June 2010, she 

suffered from an annular tear and herniated disc in her back. 

Mannella is disabled because her back impairment substantially 

limits the operation of her musculoskeletal function. 

b. In September 2012, Defendant initially accommodated Mannella’s 

back impairment by letting her return to work as a cashier and use 

the hand scanner to scan items in customer’s grocery carts. 

Defendant then refused to let Mannella continue working as a 

cashier, claiming she could not perform the essential functions of 

the job because she had to lift the items out of the customer’s 

grocery carts instead of using the hand scanner. Defendant 

violated the ADA when it failed to continue to reasonably 

accommodate Mannella and discharged her because of her 

disability on or about December 4, 2013. 

2:14-cv-13757-AJT-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 09/30/14 Pg 3 of 6 Pg ID 3
4 

9. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 8 

above were intentional. 

10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 8 above 

were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected 

rights of Barriger. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: 

 A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its 

officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active 

concert or participation with it, from refusing to provide a reasonable 

accommodation to disabled employees. 

B. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its 

officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active 

concert or participation with it, from discharging qualified individuals with 

disabilities who are seeking to return to work with restrictions. 

C. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, 

practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for 

qualified individuals with disabilities, and which eradicate the effects of its past 

and present unlawful employment practices. 

D. Order Defendant to make Mannella whole by providing appropriate 

back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and 

other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful 

2:14-cv-13757-AJT-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 09/30/14 Pg 4 of 6 Pg ID 4
5 

employment practices, including but not limited to reinstatement and front 

pay. 

 D. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Mannella by providing 

compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful 

employment practices described in paragraph 8 above in amounts to be 

determined at trial. 

 E. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Mannella by providing 

compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the 

unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 8 above, including but not 

limited to emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience and humiliation, in 

amounts to be determined at trial. 

F. Order Defendant Employer to pay Mannella punitive damages for 

its malicious and reckless conduct, as described in paragraph 8 above, in 

amounts to be determined at trial. 

 G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper 

in the public interest. 

 H. Award the Commission its costs of this action. 

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

 The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its 

complaint. 

2:14-cv-13757-AJT-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 09/30/14 Pg 5 of 6 Pg ID 5
6 

 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 

 COMMISSION 

 s/ Laurie A. Young 

 LAURIE A. YOUNG 

 Regional Attorney 

 s/ Kenneth L. Bird 

 KENNETH L. BIRD 

 Supervisory Trial Attorney 

 s/ Nedra Campbell 

 NEDRA D. CAMPBELL (P58768) 

 Trial Attorney 

 DETROIT DISTRICT OFFICE 

 Patrick V. McNamara Federal Building 

 477 Michigan Ave, Room 865 

 Detroit, Michigan 48226 

 (313) 226-3410 

 nedra.campbell@eeoc.gov

 Dated: September 29, 2014 

2:14-cv-13757-AJT-DRG Doc # 1 Filed 09/30/14 Pg 6 of 6 Pg ID 6