Sentencia de Tribunal Apelativo de 10 de Diciembre de 2008, número de resolución KLAN200801543
| Emisor | Tribunal Apelativo |
| Número de resolución | KLAN200801543 |
| Tipo de recurso | Apelación |
| Fecha de Resolución | 10 de Diciembre de 2008 |
LEXTA20081210-02 Esterás v. San Juan Bautista Medical
Center, Inc.
| Rosita Esterás Apelante- Esteras v. San Juan Bautista Medical Center, Inc.; Escuela De Medicina San Juan Bautista, Inc. | KLAN200801543 | APELACIÓN Procedente del Tribunal de Primera Instancia, Superior de Bayamón Sobre: Vacaciones y Días por Enfermedad, Proc. Sumario Caso Núm. DPE2008-0183 |
Panel integrado por su presidente, Juez Arbona Lago, el Juez Salas Soler y la Jueza Cotto
Vives.
Arbona Lago, J.
En San Juan, Puerto Rico, a 10 de diciembre de 2008.
La Sra. Rosita
Esteras (Esterás), solicita que revisemos la Sentencia Sumaria dictada por el Tribunal de Primera Instancia, Sala de Bayamón (TPI) el 15 de septiembre de 2008. Dicho dictamen desestima la causa de acción de la apelante, en la que alegadamente El
instó su reclamación conforme a las disposiciones de la Ley Sumaria de Reclamaciones Laborales, Ley Núm. 2 del 12 de octubre de 1961, 32 LPRA sec. 3118. El archivo en autos de copia de la notificación de la sentencia ocurrió el 24 de septiembre de 2008.
Esterás, dama de 64 años de edad, trabajaba para SJBMC, como Directora Ejecutiva desde el 16 de febrero de 2001, cuando fue despedida el 18 de febrero de 2005. No conforme, instó contra su patrono y ante el Tribunal de Distrito Federal para el distrito de Puerto Rico, la demanda civil Núm.06-1857 bajo el Age Discrimination in Employment Act. (ADEA) 29
..
23.
.
24.
Defendants conduct against Esteras constitutes discrimination on the basis of age in violation of the ADEA.
25.
As a proximate result of the defendants discriminatory practices Esteras has suffered intensely, has been deprived of her means of livelihood and has been emotionally devastated.
25.
Defendants are liable under ADEA to Esteras for compensatory and emotional damages, backpay, loss of income, salaries and benefits, and she is entitled to be reinstated to her former position, which she held prior to her discriminatory discharge, and/or front pay in lieu of reinstatement until age 70.
27.
28.
Defendants discriminatory conduct constitutes a willful violation of the ADEA. As a result thereof defendants are liable to Esteras
for liquidated damages in an amount equal to his backpay
and frontpay.
29.
30. Defendants conduct constitutes discrimination on the basis of age in violation of Law No. 100 of June 30, 1959, as amended and as a result thereof defendants are liable to Esteras for compensatory and double damages.
31.
32.
Plaintiff was employee in commerce and industry for the Denfedants, for which he worked for compensation under contract without a fixed period of time.
33. Defendants employed Esteras from February 16, 2001 until February 18, 2005, when she was terminated.
34. Defendants discharge Esteras from her employment in violation of 29 LPRA Section 185a et seq., which entitles her to the approximate amount of $40,000.00. (Apéndice Págs.
12-16)
Como remedio, Esterás solicitó lo siguiente:
PETITION FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, all premises considered, Plaintiff prays that judgment be entered in his favor and against the Defendants including the following relief:
1. An order directing the Defendants to reinstate Esteras to her employment or an award of front pay until age 70 in lieu of reinstatement and to cease and desist of any discriminatory conduct due to her age.
2. Back pay, together with interest.
3. Lost benefits and salaries both, past and future.
4. Severance pay under 29 LPRA Section 185a.
5. An award of liquidated...
Para continuar leyendo
Solicita tu prueba