Ahmed V. Metropolitan Government Of Nashville And Davidson County, Tennessee

Case Background

On March 20, 2020, Karen Hunt Ahmed filed an employment discrimination suit against the Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee, alleging infringement of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967(“ADEA”).  This case was filed at the United States District Court, Tennessee Middle (Nashville). This case was assigned to Chief Judge William L. Campbell, Jr and referred to Magistrate Judge Jeffery S. Frensley. [Case number: 3:20cv242]

Cause

On December 28, 2017, Plaintiff Karen Hunt Ahmed (Ahmed) contacted the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department (“MNPD”) to explore a career as a police officer. At that time, she lived in Oak Park, Illinois, where she had worked for ten years as a social sciences professor and high school teacher.

Ahmed completed a nine-month application process and joined the MNPD Training Academy as a police officer trainee on October 16, 2018, at age 51. She relocated from Oak Park, Illinois to Nashville, Tennessee on October 11, 2018, to start her new career.

On her first training day, October 16, 2018, Ms. Ahmed and 75 classmates received paperwork and instructions and completed a physical fitness test. She met or exceeded the graduation standards in push-ups, sit-ups, and running.

On October 17, 2018, Ahmed arrived for the second day of training by 6:15 a.m. Opening speeches ended around 7:30 a.m. As the second person called, she faced immediate targeting. When instructed to retrieve a red bin, an instructor kicked it out of her hands and berated her. She performed “bear crawls” to retrieve her items and faced criticism regardless of whether she ran or walked. Ahmed faced consistent singling out, while others received more lenient treatment. Training Officers Bridgeman, Wall, and Schmitz used aggressive language and made derogatory comments about her age, including calling her “lazy” and “fat,” and suggesting she watch shows stereotypically associated with middle-aged women. Despite these comments, Ahmed remained calm and positive. Later, Captain Stephens accused her of a bad attitude, citing eye-rolling and smirking.

Ahmed resumed training as class leader, facing continued mistreatment. Training Officers threw her water bottle down a hill, making her retrieve it via “bear crawls.” Despite constant criticism, she was repeatedly given leadership roles and responsibilities.

During an exercise, Ahmed sought clarification on a “dongle” and faced verbal abuse from Training Officer Bridgeman. He falsely claimed she hit him, leading to her removal from the gym. She was later accused of hitting Bridgeman and faced false claims about her attitude. She was told she would be terminated if she did not resign. Ahmed signed a termination notice under protest after leaving the meeting with Captain Stephens.

Damages

As a direct result of the Defendant’s Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”) violation, Plaintiff experienced significant economic losses. These losses included lost earnings and reduced future earnings. Additionally, the Plaintiff lost opportunities for retirement benefits, health insurance, dental insurance, vision insurance, life insurance, and paid time off.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal Representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Karen Hunt Ahmed
    • Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Colin Brett Calhoun | Joseph Davis Swafford
  • Defendant(s): Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee |
    • Counsel for Defendant(s): John Whitaker | Melissa S. Roberge

Claims

Count I: Age Discrimination in Violation of the ADEA

At the time of her hiring, the Plaintiff was 51 years old.

Defendant, through its employees and agents, discriminated against Plaintiff based on her age, violating the ADEA by terminating her employment on October 17, 2018.

The comments made to Plaintiff by employees and agents of Defendant, including Captain Stephens, Training Officer Bridgeman, Training Officer Wall, and Training Officer Schmitz, demonstrated discriminatory bias and provided evidence of age discrimination. These comments, along with the abusive and disparate treatment she received, indicated that the Defendant’s actions were willful and knowing. The MNPD’s antidiscrimination policy showed an understanding of the federal prohibition against age discrimination.

The employees and agents involved had the authority to terminate or influence the termination of Plaintiff’s employment, and her termination was a direct result of her age. Employees in the Plaintiff’s training class who were not in the protected class received more favorable treatment.

Defense

In their response, the Defendants asserted that all actions taken by the Metropolitan Government were based on legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons. They claimed these actions were conducted in good faith, without malice or ill-will towards the Plaintiff.

At the time of her hiring, Plaintiff was 51 years old, and she was also 51 years old when the alleged adverse employment actions occurred.

Defendants contended that no agent of the Metropolitan Government took any employment action against the Plaintiff that would qualify for recovery under the ADEA. Furthermore, Defendants argued that if Plaintiff failed to mitigate her alleged damages, this failure would either bar or reduce her ability to recover damages.

Lastly, if any evidence obtained after the Plaintiff’s employment termination could justify her dismissal, Defendants claimed that such evidence would bar her from recovering damages.

Jury Verdict

On September 03, 2024, the Nashville jury found in favor of the Defendant Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee. The court determined that the Defendant did not discriminate against Ms. Ahmed in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Accordingly, the court awarded no damages.

On September 04, 2024, Chief Judge William L. Campbell, Jr entered a final judgment consistent with the verdict.

Court Documents:

Available upon request