An Illinois trucking firm employee desperately wanted a promotion from dockman to spotter: The base salary was higher, there were more chances for lucrative overtime, and the job was physically less taxing than dockman. But he didn't get promoted, so he sued the company, charging that his age and national origin had held him back. He also claimed retaliation for the numerous suits he had previously filed.

What happened. Momcilo Filipovich was born in the former Yugoslavia and has worked as a dockman for K&R Express Systems since 1982; by late 2004, he was 62. His duties are to load and unload freight on trucks and trailers. Being a spotter, however, would have enabled him to move trailers among various loading docks rather than handling freight.

Only trouble was, to gain a spotter's job, he needed not only to sign up when an opening was posted (no problem) but also to pass a road test for driving trailers (big problem). In fact, Filipovich twice tried to pass the road test and twice failed. A supervisor tried to train him, but the instruction didn't take.

One of Filipovich's lawsuits, filed in 1995, was decided in the employer's favor in 1999. But before that ruling was issued, he sued again, in 1998. A federal district court sent some of his charges to a jury, which awarded him compensatory and punitive damages for age discrimination and retaliation. After the verdict, however, the court overturned both the punitive damages and the award for age bias, because Filipovich could not point to a younger employee who had been treated more favorably. He appealed to the 7th circuit, which covers Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin (and had ruled on his earlier suit).

What the court said. Between May 1998 and December 1999 (when his earlier lawsuit was defeated), Filipovich amassed eight disciplinary letters regarding his work as a dockman. In court, he said he had not committed the work errors cited, so the letters were retaliatory. He also claimed he had mastered the skills of driving a trailer but not been given the (third) chance to demonstrate them.

With shipping manifests, K&R documented Filipovich's work errors and showed that earlier attempts to train him to drive trailers were out of the ordinary and not offered to other drivers. So appellate judges dismissed all of Filipovich's charges--again. Filipovich v. K&R Express Systems, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, Nos. 03-2038, -2070, and -3011 (12/7/04).

Point to remember: No matter how often a troublesome employee sues you, good documentation will help you every time.