BI’s Article search uses Boolean search capabilities. If you are not familiar with these principles, here are some quick tips.

To search specifically for more than one word, put the search term in quotation marks. For example, “workers compensation”. This will limit your search to that combination of words.

To search for a combination of terms, use quotations and the & symbol. For example, “hurricane” & “loss”.

Login Register Subscribe

Compensable harm appeal rejected


WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court has refused to consider an appeal of a case in which a Muslim immigrant from Afghanistan was found to have been subjected to an offensive and hostile work environment, but received no compensatory or punitive damages.

Abdul Azimi asked the high court to consider his case after the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals declined to award him any damages despite the fact that a district court jury found that he suffered racial, religious or ethnic harassment at his former employer, Jordan Meats Inc., in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The jury for the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine, however, found Mr. Azimi did not suffer any compensable harm as a result of the discrimination and therefore did not award him any compensatory damages.

Mr. Azimi provided no evidence of out-of-pocket costs for medical or psychological treatment or lost wages, court papers say.

Mr. Azimi appealed the ruling on several counts, including that the jury was required to award compensatory damages either as a matter of law or because the evidence compelled it.

In denying the appeal, the appeals court ruled last August that the Supreme Court "long ago" rejected the argument that a finding of a hostile work environment requires that there be an award of compensatory damages.

Abdul Azimi vs. Jordan's Meats Inc., 1st U.S. Court of Appeals; No. 05-2602