Cipolla v. The Village of Oak Lawn

Plaintiff sued Village for age discrimination, for her termination at age 59. Special interrogatory asked jury whether village fired Plaintiff because of her age. Jury asked question, during deliberations, whether "fired" included laid off, terminated, or elimination of job position, but as this was not a question of law, trial judge properly responded that it was a question of fact for jury to decide. Court properly refused to give "cat's paw" liability instruction, as there was no clear evidence that Village finance department director, who recommended eliminating Plaintiff's position, had discriminatory intent who had a "singular influence" on Village manager who told Plaintiff her position was being terminated due to budget gap. (PUCINSKI and MASON, concurring.)