Doke v. Atrium Hospitality

Filing 19

ORDER granting 16 Motion to Strike. Signed on 10/1/2018 by Magistrate Judge David P. Rush. (DO)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
PAUL DOKE,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
ATRIUM HOSPITALITY LP,
Defendant.

No. 18-03185-CV-S-DPR

ORDER
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Strike. (Doc. 16.) Although suggestions in
opposition to the motion were due by September 27, 2018, to date none have been filed. Upon
review, the motion will be GRANTED.
Defendant moves for an order striking Plaintiff’s demands for punitive damages and
emotional distress damages.

Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint brings counts for age

discrimination and retaliation under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
(“ADEA”). In both counts, Plaintiff claims he has been monetarily damaged and has also “suffered
physical and mental pain, anguish and distress.” His prayer for relief includes punitive damages
and “any other available remedies or damages for injuries suffered by Plaintiff,” which presumably
could encompass the aforementioned “physical and mental pain, anguish and distress.”
Although the ADEA does allow the recovery of liquidated damages where the employer’s
violation is willful, it does not provide for the recovery of punitive damages. Williams v. Valentec
Kisco, Inc., 964 F.2d 723, 729 (8th Cir. 1992). Furthermore, the ADEA does not permit the award
of emotional distress damages. Maschka v. Genuine Parts Co., 122 F.3d 566, 573 (8th Cir. 1993)

(citation omitted). Accordingly, neither punitive damages, nor emotional distress damages are
available in this ADEA suit.
Based on the foregoing, and also because it is unopposed, the Motion to Strike is
GRANTED. Plaintiff’s demands for emotional distress damages and punitive damages under the
ADEA are hereby stricken.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ David P. Rush
DAVID P. RUSH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DATE: October 1, 2018

2