New Jersey residents are undoubtedly familiar with Target, a retailing giant with stores across the country. This week, the company settled a wrongful termination lawsuit filed by one of its employees that alleged that Target failed to provide accommodation for her disability and then fired her when she failed to return from break on time.

According to the woman, doctors have diagnosed her with a mental disability that makes it difficult for her to mark the passage of time. In the lawsuit, she stated that the store knew of her disability, and she relied on other employees to help her know when she was supposed to begin and end her employer-provided breaks. Target policy provides for automatic termination when an employee is late on three breaks within 18 months, and when the woman was tardy for the third time, Target fired her.

A few months later, the woman filed her wrongful termination suit in state court. Using the legal doctrine of diversity jurisdiction, Target moved the case to federal court. Broadly speaking, diversity jurisdiction allows a federal court to hear a case if the parties, including corporations, are from different states.

The lawsuit also alleged that Target opposed the woman’s subsequent unemployment benefits application. A state agency later found that Target’s action was “without merit.” In its court filings, Target denied that it had failed to provide accommodations for the woman’s disability because it claimed it did not know that she had a disability. But the company eventually agreed to settle the case for $275,000. It had requested that the terms of the settlement be kept under seal, but the judge in the case denied the request.

Source: The Sacramento Bee, “Target settles case of Woodland employee fired for being late to lunch,” Denny Walsh, May 19, 2012.