4th Circuit cuts fired Wells Fargo exec’s award from $22M to $18M

The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals has scaled back the amount of money a former Wells Fargo Securities executive can collect for his firing in 2022. A federal jury in North Carolina awarded Christopher John Billesdon $22 million, while Friday’s appellate decision lowers the total to roughly $18 million.

Billesdon accused Wells Fargo of firing him because of a disability that required frequent restroom access.

A split 2-1 Appeals Court panel accepted some of the bank’s arguments while preserving the jury’s finding that Billesdon was entitled to millions of dollars in front and back pay.

Billesdon worked for Wells Fargo Securities “for almost three decades,” managing a paralyzed bladder and colon for much of the time without incident. After 2017, he needed increased restroom access, according to the 4th Circuit’s opinion. After the company turned to remote work during the COVID pandemic, Billesdon relocated his family from California to Charlotte in August 2020.

When the company moved to have employees return to the office, Billesdon sought an exception in August 2021 to work from home permanently. Wells Fargo fired Bllesdon in February 2022, 18 days before the company’s return-to-office date.  

He sued the company in March 2023, claiming “failure to accommodate, discriminatory discharge, and retaliation,” the majority opinion explained. “He also claimed Wells Fargo wrongfully discharged him in violation of North Carolina public policy, as set forth in the North Carolina Equal Employment Practices Act.”

“Billesdon enjoyed a long and successful career at Wells Fargo — until he submitted a formal accommodation request to permanently work from home,” Judge Julius Richardson wrote for the majority. “The evidence allowed the jury to find that Wells Fargo retaliated against Billesdon because he requested an accommodation. The jury compensated him accordingly. We do not lightly disturb that on appeal. The other liability verdicts and portions of the relief do not survive.”   

While striking some of Billesdon’s claims, the majority upheld the portion of his case alleging retaliation that violated the Americans with Disabilities Act.

“The ADA prevents an employer from retaliating against an employee because that employee requested an accommodation,” Richardson wrote. “Wells Fargo contests only whether Billesdon proved causation. A reasonable jury could find, and the clear weight of the evidence does not refute finding, that Billesdon’s remote-work accommodation request was a but-for cause of his discharge.”

“The record contains substantial circumstantial evidence of retaliatory motivation,” Richardson added. “The timeline alone supports finding causation.”

Senior managers “learned of Billesdon’s accommodation request in late October,” the 4th Circuit opinion explained. “Soon thereafter — by ‘October, November, somewhere in there,’ … — they decided to add Billesdon to the planned reduction in force.”

Richardson also noted the impact of senior managers’ “actions and attitudes.”

“Billesdon presented evidence from which a jury could infer that their treatment of Billesdon changed markedly after they learned about his request,” the majority opinion explained. His performance review was downgraded, “[a]nd the senior managers largely ‘iced’ him out of conversations after he made the request. The senior managers also reacted to the request with skepticism and dismissiveness.”

The original 2024 jury verdict featured $6 million in back pay, $14 million in front pay, $100,000 for emotional distress, $1 million in ADA punitive damages (later lowered to $300,000), and $1 million in punitive damages under North Carolina law.

“Billesdon’s ADA retaliation claim alone survives,” Richardson wrote. “So we must vacate the awards of (1) punitive damages under North Carolina law, (2) punitive damages under the ADA, and (3) emotional-distress damages.”

The 4th Circuit also cut the back pay award to no more than $4.2 million but left the $14 million front pay award intact. Appellate judges have also ordered the trial court to reconsider how much interest Wells Fargo should pay.

Judge Harvie Wilkinson joined Richardson’s opinion. Judge Nicole Berner issued a partial dissent.

“I respectfully disagree with the majority’s conclusions regarding Christopher Billesdon’s federal and state law disability discrimination claims and the jury’s calculation of the back-pay award,” Berner wrote. “Wells Fargo has not met the high bar for reversal following a jury verdict on these issues.”

“4th Circuit cuts fired Wells Fargo exec’s award from $22M to $18M” was originally published on www.carolinajournal.com.