Mignone v. Mo. Dep't of Corr., 546 S.W.3d 23 (2018)

Citation: Mignone v. Mo. Dep't of Corr., 546 S.W.3d 23 (2018)
Parent Document: Mignone v. Mo. Dep't of Corr., 546 S.W.3d 23 (2018)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 2018-02-06
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6241530/mignone-v-mo-dept-of-corr/ ↗

Full Text

1,231 chars

The Department argues that, considering the State Farm factors, its conduct was not reprehensible. We disagree. With respect to Mignone's first retaliation claim, the jury could find that her transfer out of Housing Unit 6, and the failure to return her to Unit 6, involved trickery and deceit, rather than mere accident. The Department's own investigator agreed with Mignone's assessment that the fabricated inmate threat was "a ploy to get her out of six (6) house," and the Warden used further deception when Mignone sought to return, by falsely denying that the internal investigation of the threat had concluded. The Department then engaged in a pattern of retaliation through repeated unjustified log entries, which were approved by multiple supervisory employees. "Though it is true that [Mignone]'s harm was neither physical nor economic, it was certainly emotional and psychological," Diaz , 484 S.W.3d at 90, resulting in emotional distress that was severe enough that she was diagnosed with anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder, and prescribed medication. The acts underlying Mignone's first retaliation claim, when viewed in the aggregate,7 were sufficiently reprehensible to justify a punitive award of $400,000.

Other Sections in This Document (127)

Full Text