From Silent News : The World’s Most Popular Newspaper of The Deaf

Jury awards Texas man $6 million for harassment by automobile salesmen

The Texas Court of Appeals has upheld a 1991 decision to award nearly $6 million to a deaf man who claimed he was harassed by automobile salesmen.

George Grubbs Nissan, Inc has appealed the decision of a jury Nov. 15, 1991 to award Mitchel Bien $573,000 for actual damages, $222,000 for prejudgment interest and $5 millions in exemplary damages, but the Court of Appeals found the evidence sufficient and affirmed the decision July 27.

The incident, Michael Bien claimed in a lawsuit, has had a harmful effect on his ability to function, leaving him unable to hold down on a job and relate to “the hearing world.”

Michael Johnston, who represented Bien, said that this case will offer anyone who is harassed of physical impairment – by a car dealership the opportunity to sue for damages. “That’s the main significance of the case,” Johnston said. “Mitchel was treated not because he was deaf, but because he walked into the door.”

In December 1987, Bien went to the dealership to look at cars. A salesman talked Bien into writing a check for $4,000, telling him falsely that the check was needed to show the manager and get a better deal. The salesman also took the key to Bien’s truck so that it could be appraised. Bien, a Euless resident, repeatedly asked that his check and keys be returned, but the salesman ignored his requests.

When he got home – approximately five hours later after he had entered the dealership-he was upset and making a crying and yelling noise, his mother testified.

After the incident, Bien sought psychiatric counseling from three doctors. All of the experts concluded that he suffered from severe anxiety disorder that was directly attributable to the incident at the dealership.

The Court of Appeals noted that the dealership had “trapped” Bien. “They had his check ….and they also had his keys. They knew [Bien] was deaf and could not use the phone to call for help,” the Court wrote in its opinion. Bien is not entitled to attorney’s fees on top of the judgment, the Court ruled.