Defending a small business against a discrimination lawsuit in Missouri can be a costly, but sometimes the best lawyer for the job can win the case and save you money.
Quick answer: A discrimination lawsuit does not necessarily have to break the bank to be won. In this case, James Law Group represented a St. Peters, Missouri small business sued by a former employee for disability discrimination and wrongful termination. Careful legal research found a fatal procedural defect, a missed filing deadline, and records that contradicted the plaintiff’s claims of hardship.
The case was resolved in the employer’s favor without a trial and without the legal bills that Plaintiffs’ attorneys often count on to force a settlement.
(Details have been modified to protect client confidentiality.)
The Claim: Disability Discrimination and Wrongful Termination in Missouri
A former employee sued our client, a locally owned small business in St. Peters, MO. She alleged that, after the employer learned of her mental health diagnosis, supervisors repeatedly used demeaning language about her mental health, refused any workplace accommodation, and ultimately fired her during a heated confrontation. She sought damages for discrimination and unlawful termination, including claims of severe financial hardship.
Our client denied the allegations. Mental health conditions can qualify as disabilities under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), so claims like this are serious and are treated that way.
The Defense on the Facts Was Strong, but the Cost of winning the case Was the Real Threat
On the merits, the employer had a solid position. Co-worker statements described an employee with attendance problems who frequently missed work or left early, who was often in conflict with colleagues, and who did not pull her weight on the team.
But strong facts don’t make litigation cheap. Taking a case through discovery, depositions, and a jury trial can cost a small business tens of thousands of dollars, sometimes more than the claim is worth. Plaintiffs’ attorneys know this. Many discrimination lawsuits are brought to pressure a business into a “cost-of-defense” settlement, paying money not because the claim is valid, but because fighting it is expensive.
Our client came to us with a clear goal: don’t pay for a claim that isn’t legitimate, and don’t spend a fortune winning the case.
The Strategy: Win on the Law Before Spending Money on a Trial
Our attorneys took a research-first approach. Before the case reached the expensive phases of litigation, we scrutinized every aspect of the Plaintiff’s filings and claims. That work paid off in three ways:
1. The Plaintiff missed the filing deadline.
Discrimination claims in Missouri are governed by strict timelines. Under the MHRA, a charge generally must be filed with the Missouri Human Rights Commission within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act. The Plaintiff appeared to have filed on the last day allowed by the law. But, detailed research showed that the 180 days to file the complaint with the MHRC is calculated differently than most other legal time calculations. Although the difference is minor, the manner of time calculations that actually applies to MHRA complaints showed Plaintiff filed her complaint on the 181st day. In employment law, a day late can be as fatal as a year late.
2. Multiple legal defects undermined the claim.
Beyond the timing issue, our research identified additional legal errors in the Plaintiff’s filings that made a successful outcome for her impossible. The Plaintiff had received a “right to sue” letter from the EEOC, the federal equivalent of the MHRC, but had filed the lawsuit under the MHRA. In essence, the Plaintiff had filed the lawsuit under the state law even though they only got authority to file suit under federal law.
Although the federal and state agencies are similar and either can be used to file a workplace discrimination lawsuit, they are not identical and complying with one set of rules does not allow for filing a lawsuit under the other set of rules. The interplay and overlap between state law and federal law is one of several factors that make defending a small business against a discrimination lawsuit in Missouri both difficult and expensive. In this case, however, the confusion worked to the employer’s benefit.
3. The hardship claims did not hold up.
The Plaintiff asserted that her termination left her homeless and in extreme financial hardship. Our investigation of the financial records produced in the case showed a household income that contradicted that narrative. Claims of damages must be supported by evidence, and here the evidence pointed actually refuted Plaintiff’s claims.
The Result
The Plaintiff dismissed the case: After our attorneys explained the law and the evidence we had uncovered to the Plaintiff’s lawyer, they had little choice but to dismiss the case altogether. The business avoided protracted litigation, a trial, and a settlement payment on an unsupported claim. This victory was obtained for a a fraction of legal fees that a full defense would have required.
Key Takeaways for Defending a small business against a discrimination lawsuit in Missouri
- Deadlines are everything. Missouri’s discrimination statutes contain strict filing requirements. Every claim should be checked against them immediately.
- Early, thorough legal research saves money. Finding a dispositive defect early can end a case before the costliest stages begin.
- Verify the damages. Claims of hardship should be tested against actual evidence.
- Document everything. Attendance records, written policies, and co-worker statements gathered promptly make a defense far stronger.
- Treat every complaint seriously. Even a defensible claim deserves a careful, professional response. A business sued for discrimination can spend tens of thousands of dollars on legal fees even if the lawsuit is a total fabrication. Defending a small business against a discrimination lawsuit in Missouri takes knowledge, skill, and zealous advocacy – if when the complaint is unfounded.
Frequently Asked Questions
How long does an employee have to file a discrimination claim in Missouri?
Generally, 180 days from the alleged discriminatory act to file with the Missouri Commission on Human Rights. Federal EEOC charges generally have a 300-day window in Missouri. After a right-to-sue notice is issued, the employee has 90 days to file suit.
Can a small business be sued for disability discrimination in Missouri?
Yes. It is not uncommon for small businesses to be targeted by such lawsuits. Small businesses are often seen as having enough money to pay a settlement but not as having so much money as to be able to pay for extended litigation while risking a judgment against them. In other words, they can be targets for cash grabs.
Does it cost a fortune defending a small business against a discrimination lawsuit in Missouri?
It can, if the case goes through full discovery and trial, it can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Such cases can cost several fortunes if they are lost, however. If a jury sides with the Plaintiff, the small business may end up with a six-figure verdict against it and responsible for paying tens of thousands of dollars in attorney’s fees to the Plaintiff’s attorney on top of their own legal fees. That is why early legal analysis, including procedural deadlines, matters. Resolving a case at the right stage can protect a business’s finances.
Should I settle a discrimination lawsuit just to make it go away?
Not before a qualified employment defense attorney has evaluated the claim. As this case shows, a procedural defect or contradicted damages can change everything.
Facing an Employment Lawsuit in St. Peters or St. Charles County?
James Law Group helps small businesses defend discrimination, wrongful termination, and other claims across St. Peters, St. Charles, O’Fallon, Wentzville, Lake St. Louis, and the greater St. Louis region. If you’ve received a demand letter, an EEOC or MCHR charge, or a lawsuit, contact us before you respond.
Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This article is for general information and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case depends on its own facts.