00-2547 Merheb v. Illinois State Toll Highway Authority

Listen to this article

“[T]he issue is not whether Merheb was a menace; it’s whether he appeared to be. Unlike the plaintiff in Crawford v. Runyon, 37 F.3d 1338, 1341-42 (8th Cir. 1994), he doesn’t deny having engaged in the conduct that led him to be fired and there is no doubt that several employees were seriously frightened by his outburst. Two of them complained immediately to Swidergal, and their complaints were corroborated by what Sinz heard on the phone. The deposition testimony of other employees makes clear that Merheb had put a fright into them as well. Merheb could have contested that testimony by attempting to show, for example, that they had been induced to testify so by threats or promises by the employer. He did not. Workplace violence is sufficiently common to have given rise to the expression ‘go postal’ (a generic term for attacking coemployees, not one limited to postal employees) used by one of these employees, and to justify management in treating threatening behavior with exemplary severity.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Norgle, J., Posner, J.