Walmart was ordered to pay $420,000 after firing a worker with Down syndrome. It tried to get a fresh trial, but just had that request denied.

• Walmart fired a store worker with Down syndrome in 2015 for "excessive absenteeism."
• A judge ordered Walmart to pay the worker $420,000 and rehire her, citing disability discrimination.

A federal judge has rejected Walmart's request for a new trial related to a disability discrimination lawsuit. The retailer had previously been ordered to pay more than $400,000 to a former employee with Down syndrome for firing her for "excessive absenteeism" after changing her schedule.

In July 2021, a federal jury determined that Walmart had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act when it fired Marlo Spaeth, a sales associate at a store in Wisconsin, in July 2015. She had worked for the company for close to 16 years.

A federal jury awarded her $125 million in damages, though the judge later reduced this to $300,000, the maximum amount allowed under federal law. In March, Walmart was also ordered to pay Spaeth a further $119,660, including back pay, and to rehire her.

The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which represented Spaeth, said in the complaint, first filed in January 2017, that Walmart's shift to a digital timetable system changed her previously consistent schedule and caused her "significant difficulty."

"Wal-Mart knew that Ms. Spaeth was disabled and that she had requested a return to the old schedule because if she could not eat supper on time she would get sick," the EEOC wrote in the lawsuit.

It said that Walmart had denied repeated requests from Spaeth to revert to the prior work schedule and fired her for "excessive absenteeism." It then refused to rehire her after she requested a return to her former work schedule, per the EEOC's lawsuit.

"Wal-Mart failed to accommodate Ms. Spaeth, unlawfully disciplined her, terminated her employment, and failed to rehire her," the EEOC wrote.

In April Walmart requested a new trial, saying that "nothing in Walmart's knowledge" suggested that Spaeth's request to return to her previous schedule was linked to her Down syndrome and that it had never been given a doctor's note explaining the link.

The retailer said that its lack of knowledge about the link meant it did not act with "malice or reckless indifference" toward her disability when it terminated Spaeth.

Walmart added that over the course of her employment, it had given Spaeth "far more leeway for her attendance violations than its policies require."

Walmart said that the jury's award of $150,000 in compensatory damages award was "grossly excessive" and said that a doctor's testimony suggested that her depression "was not solely caused by the events of this case" because it started around six to eight months after she was terminated." It said that the court should thus remit the compensatory damages from $150,000 to $15,000.

William C. Griesbach, district judge for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, denied Walmart's request for a new trial and to remit damages on Monday.

"Based on the evidence presented at trial and the jury's determination that Walmart was aware of Spaeth's disability but refused her numerous requests for a disability accommodation, terminated her, and declined to reinstate her after Spaeth's sister referred to the ADA, Walmart acted 'in the face of a perceived risk' that its conduct would violate federal law," Griesbach wrote.

Walmart did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment. A Walmart spokesperson told CNBC that the company was "reviewing the opinion and considering our options."

Spaeth's sister, Amy Jo Stevenson, told the network that the judge's ruling was a relief after the termination took away Spaeth's sense of purpose. She said that Spaeth "still hasn't seen a penny."