are satisfied the jury's verdicts were reasonable.


37
Lastly, WCC argues that the district court's error in joining parties permitted the inclusion of evidence and testimony that would not have been otherwise available to each plaintiff individually.  WCC's principal contention on this point concerns Lockhart's use of an age-related comment made in January 1984 by Robert Barbour, who was at that time Senior Vice-President of WCC's Commercial Services.  At trial, Donald French, a former WCC employee, testified that Barbour had told him that "Westinghouse Credit was a seniority driven company with old management and that's going to change, 'I'm going to change that.' "    App. at 628.  WCC asserts that since Barbour was not associated with the Financial Services division until after Lockhart's termination,fact can properly consider the character of the defendant's act, [and] the nature and extent of the harm to the plaintiff that the defendant caused or intended to cause."    See Restatement (Second) of Torts Sec. 908(2).


73
Durham asserts that the evidence of WCC's outrageous conduct in terminating him is found in the fact that he put an overwhelming amount of extra work hours into planning the Atlanta Area Business Center that he operated until his termination;  that WCC asked him to work for one month after being notified of his discharge in order to train his reputed replacement;  that his termination occurred when he was under a contract to buy a new house that he was forced to purchase while jobless;  and that