In August 2013, plaintiff T.J. Simers, 63, a sports columnist for the Los Angeles Times, met with editor Davan Maharaj and managing editor Marc Duvoisin about a video interview with an NBA player during which Simers allegedly practiced unethical behavior. Simers was served a “final written warning” and allegedly told that he could only stay at the paper if he accepted a demotion from columnist to reporter and admitted to the ethical breach. Simers refused the demotion, and he claimed that he was forced to resign from his position. Simers sued Maharaj; Duvoisin; and the operators of the newspaper, the Tribune Co., Tribune Media Net Inc., Tribune Interactive, the Los Angeles Times, and Los Angeles Times Communications LLC. Simers also sued the owner of the Los Angeles Dodgers, Frank McCourt. Simers alleged that the actions of Maharaj, Duvoisin, and the operators of the Los Angeles Times constituted age and disability discrimination and that the defendants constructively discharged him. He also alleged that the defendants forced him out of his position to silence his criticism of McCourt, who was friends with the publisher of the Los Angeles Times. The matter ultimately continued against Los Angeles Times Communications only. Simers, who suffers from complex migraine syndrome, contended that he had a 22-year track record of only positive performance reviews at the Los Angeles Times, but that in 2013, he collapsed from what was then diagnosed as a transient ischemic attack, or mini-stroke, while on the job. He claimed that after his collapse, he was discriminated against based on his age and disability and that he was served a “final written warning” in August 2013, just months after he suffered the mini-stroke, despite never being previously given any critical performance reviews. Defense counsel argued that prior to being issued the final written warning, Simers was repeatedly spoken to about the tone and content of his columns, and asked to improve his grammar. Counsel also argued that asking Simers to write fewer columns a week did not qualify as a big demotion and that the paper wanted to keep Simers on staff, and did not terminate him or force him to quit. On Nov. 4, 2015, a jury awarded Simers $7.13 million in damages regarding the claims of both age discrimination and disability discrimination. However, the court granted defense counsel’s motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict on the constructive termination claim but denied the motion regarding the discrimination claims. As a result, the damages verdict was set aside. Both sides appealed the post-trial judgment. The Court of Appeal agreed with, and completely affirmed, the trial judge’s decision. The matter was then sent back to the trial court to have a jury decide the amount of noneconomic damages that should be awarded in regard to the adverse actions against Simers, including the demotion based on age and disability discrimination., Simers worked for the Los Angeles Times for 23 years, the last 13 years of which he was a featured “Page Two” columnist, and he continued to produce his popular column despite his health issues. During the retrial, Simers claimed that, during the time of his employment with the Los Angeles Times, he received 22 years of praise on his merits. He also claimed that in the month before he was hospitalized, the Los Angeles Times employment review stated that he was a “must read,” but that after his hospitalization, he was demoted and told he was no longer a columnist. Simers claimed that he suffered emotional distress as a result of his treatment by the Los Angeles Times and that he ultimately decided to resign instead of being subjected to humiliation and further emotional distress. His family and other witnesses also testified about the debilitating loss to Simers’ reputation and identity as a columnist. Simers claimed that he was diagnosed with severe major depressive disorder. The jury was instructed not to award any damages for Simers’ decision to leave the newspaper or for the investigation that was performed, because the newspaper had a right to do an investigation. It was also instructed not to award noneconomic damages for anything caused by other physical ailments. In addition, the second trial did not include any economic damages or any damages for the constructive discharge, as those parts of the case were previously thrown out by the prior trial court judge and the Court of Appeal. Simers sought recovery of noneconomic damages for his alleged emotional distress. Defense counsel argued that Simers should only receive nominal damages.