Christine Lucarell sued her former employer, Nationwide MutualInsurance, alleging Nationwide stopped funding her Boardman agencyin April 2009 even though she was enrolled in the company's agencyexecutive program. She also claimed the company forced her toquit in July 2009 by creating unacceptable working conditions. Shesays Nationwide told her she could earn more than $200,000 inannual commissions by participating in and successfully completingthe program.

The civil suit alleged that Nationwide used “unsustainable”monthly production quotas to cease funding of and terminate about90 of its agency executive agencies. Nationwide fired back, denyingLucarell's allegations and stating that she was not an agencyemployee but rather an independent contractor.

Lucarell filed the suit in Mahoning County Common Pleas Court inOhio. She was seeking $5 million in compensatory damages and anundetermined amount of punitive damages but won a larger verdictwhen the court ruled in her favor in November 2012. In total,the jury awarded her $5.7 million for lost profits, $1 million inemotional damages, $100,000 for retaliation and $36 million forpunitive damages, corresponding to about one-twelfth ofNationwide's annual net profits.

Nationwide is asking that the reward amount, a hefty $42million, be reduced. The company's attorney filedmotions stating the amount needs to be limited due to Ohio's tortreform statutes. He is arguing for a $350,000 cap on compensatorydamages, reducing the overall award to $10 million.

Nationwide's attorneys say several past cases show the OhioSupreme Court find lawsuits originating in the workplace fallingunder tort law and thus requiring appropriate award caps.Lucarell's attorneys disagree, stating that the tort-reformstatutes do not apply in work-related matters. They believeNationwide's attorney's example cases do not fall under “good law”because they have been reversed or fall under versions of tortreform no longer in practice today.

There is discussion surrounding possible staying of the originalverdict until the judge has ruled on all motions filed byNationwide. It has not yet been decided whether Nationwide will bemade to hold bond to insure payment of the award until after allcourt proceedings have ended. The court will hear oral arguments onthe motions beginning in mid-February 2013.