Total Articles: 22
Dukes v. Walmart Fallout
Eveyone knows about the Dukes v. Walmart case (post is here). Well, Ellis v. Costco is another "big box" retailer case, in which female managers challenged Costco's promotion practices.
What Wal-Mart v. Dukes Means to Employers
Nearly two months after the Supreme Court's decision in Wal- Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S.Ct. 2541 (June 20, 2011), employers and their attorneys are still parsing the meaning of the Court's opinion and its impact on future employment claims faced by employers. Had the Supreme Court ruled against Walmart, it would have been a decision with wide-ranging implications for large, national employers. But even in its ruling for Walmart, the Court has provided some lessons for all employers.
High Court Rules Against Certification Of Class
The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that a case brought on behalf of some 1.5 million female current and former employees of Wal-Mart should not have been certified as a class action. According to the Court, the plaintiffs were required to show that their claims depended on a common contention of such a nature that it was capable of classwide resolution - in this case, evidence that Wal-Mart "operated under a general policy of discrimination." But, the Court found that "[o]ther than the bare existence of delegated discretion, respondents have identified no `specific employment practice' - much less one that ties all their 1.5 million claims together."
Supreme Court Wal-Mart Decision Removes A Big Weapon From the Plaintiffs' Lawyers' Arsenal
C lass action litigation took a hit last week, when the U.S. Su- preme Court issued its decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a sex discrimi- nation case brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Wal- Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, U.S., No. 10-277, 6/20/11). The 5-4 majority clarified that not every aggregation of individual claims can proceed as a class action: rather, would-be class representatives must identify a question of law or fact that is com- mon to all members of the putative class, the resolution of which dis- poses of the case (26 CCW 190,
6/22/11).
WAL-MART DECISION RAISES THE BAR ON CLASS ACTIONS
Before concluding the October 2010 Term, the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling in the largest employment law class action in U.S. History, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, et al.. The decision created a stir because it reversed the lower courts’ certification of a class of approximately 1.5 million female employees. The lawsuit’s crux is that Wal-Mart discriminates against females based on their sex, particularly in promotion decisions. The Supreme Court found that the class members did not have enough in common under the applicable federal standards to proceed as a nationwide class action.
U.S. Supreme Court Overturns Certification in Wal-Mart's 1.5 Million Employee Lawsuit
On June 20, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the certification of a class of 1.5 million current and former women employed by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. I have discussed this case in numerous programs and, as I predicted, the Court ruled in a 5 to 4 majority that highly individualized claims of gender discrimination do not establish a class action based on statistics and very little proof of discrimination generally. Below are some comments about the decision for your review. If you have any questions or comments regarding this, or any other employment or labor law matter, contact Krukowski & Costello, S.C.'s educational services department at (414) 423-1330.
Ouch! Supreme Court Wal-Mart Decision Is a Blow to Plaintiffs
Class action litigation has taken one on the chin, as the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision Monday in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, a much-watched sex discrimination case brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In essence, the Court affirmed that members of a putative class must have enough in common with each other that it makes sense to treat them as "one" for purposes of the litigation. The Court also said that individualized claims for relief, including monetary damages and injunctions, must proceed under rules that allow putative class members to "opt out" and that provide procedural safeguards for defendants.
United States Supreme Court Strikes Down Largest Employment Discrimination Class Action in History
On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme
Court granted employers some long-awaited relief
by substantially raising the bar for plaintiffs (and
their lawyers) seeking to certify large employment
discrimination class actions. In Wal-Mart v. Dukes
(No. 10-277), the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals’ en banc decision upholding the
certifi cation of a class action fi led on behalf of
approximately 1.5 million hourly and salaried
female employees alleging sex discrimination in
pay and promotions. The potential damages were
estimated to be more than a billion dollars.
Thanks, Supremes! Wal-Mart v. Dukes roundup
In my opinion, the Supreme Court's decision issued Monday in Wal-Mart v. Dukes is fantastic for employers. Not all class action litigation is a racket, but much of it is, and plaintiffs' lawyers have been known to use the threat of financial devastation resulting from nationwide class suits to pressure employers into paying large settlements.
Supreme Court Limits Discrimination Class Actions in Wal-Mart Ruling
In a major victory for employers, on June 20 the U.S. Supreme Court held that a sex discrimination lawsuit brought on behalf of up to 1.5 million current and former female Wal-Mart employees could not be maintained as a class action. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes. This ruling will make it much more difficult for plaintiffs’ attorneys to maintain class action lawsuits alleging that a class of employees has been subjected to a “common policy” or practice of discrimination.
The United States Supreme Court Reins In Employment and Other Class Actions
On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme Court struck down what is believed to be the largest employment class action ever certified. The decision should significantly affect plaintiffs' ability to bring large, nationwide class action claims in federal court. This is an important victory for employers and should help them defend against class action claims in a variety of contexts.
Roll-Back in Wal-Mart Gender Discrimination Suit
On Monday, June 20, the United States Supreme Court rejected "one of the most expansive class actions ever."
High Court Rules Against Certification of Class of 1.5 Million Workers
On June 20, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a case brought on behalf of some 1.5 million female current and former employees of Wal-Mart should not have been certified as a class action. According to the Court, the plaintiffs were required to show that their claims depended on a common contention of such a nature that it was capable of classwide resolution – in this case, evidence that Wal-Mart "operated under a general policy of discrimination." But, the Court found that "[o]ther than the bare existence of delegated discretion, respondents have identified no 'specific employment practice' – much less one that ties all their 1.5 million claims together."
Supreme Court Rejects Nation-Wide Sex Discrimination Class Action
Executive Summary: In a decision that may curtail the proliferation of employment-related class actions, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Wal-Mart and decertified a nation-wide class of sex discrimination plaintiffs in a Title VII action against the company. Wal-Mart v. Dukes, No. 10-277 (June 20, 2011). The Court held that class certification was inappropriate because the plaintiffs could not show that there were issues of law or fact that are common to the class as a whole. The Court also held that the plaintiffs' back pay claims should not have been certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2). This is significant because it means that plaintiffs requesting back pay in Title VII discrimination claims may now be required to seek certification under the more demanding procedures of Rule 23(b)(3).
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Duke -- A Sigh of Relief
Analysis will come later as all I have done is read the highlight and the line up of judges. Judge Scalia's majority opinion was joined in some parts by all justices, while Justices Ginzberg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan dissented from some.
Supreme Court Reverses Certification of Nationwide Class of 1.5 Million Female Workers
The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected class action certification in “one of the most expansive class actions ever.” Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, No. 10-277 (June 20, 2011). The case involved allegations of gender discrimination in pay and promotion decisions in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made on behalf of all current and former female employees of Wal-Mart, estimated to number as many as 1.5 million. Reversing a Ninth Circuit decision that upheld the class certification, the Supreme Court found the lower courts had misapplied the federal rules governing the circumstances in which class certification should be accorded and the availability of damages as an incident of class injunctive or declaratory relief.
U.S. Supreme Court rules in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court released its long-awaited opinion on class actions, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, an employer victory.
Supreme Court to Hear Case Involving Potential Class of 1.5 Million Workers.
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review a controversial federal appeals court ruling approving the certification of a class of an estimated 1.5 million current or former female employees of Wal-Mart. The Supreme Court granted the retailers petition for certiorari on December 6, 2010. The action involved a portion of a decision by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Ninth Circuit Affirms Class Certification in Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Setting the Stage for the Largest Gender Discrimination Suit in U.S. History.
On April 26, 2010, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (the "Ninth Circuit") affirmed in part, and remanded in part, the decision of the district court for the Northern District of California (the "District Court") to certify a class of over one million female Wal-Mart employees pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 ("FRCP 23"). The case, Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Dukes"), thereby sets the stage for the largest gender discrimination lawsuit in U.S. history against the world's largest private employer. Dukes, supra, F.3d , 2010 WL 1644259 (9th Cir. April 26, 2010).
Class Action Certified In Sex Bias Suit Against Wal-Mart (scroll down).
In Dukes v. Wal-Mart, Inc., the Ninth Circuit issued a revised opinion that once again affirmed a district court order granting class certification in a lawsuit alleging that Wal-Mart discriminated against female employees in both pay and promotional opportunities in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The proposed class consists of women employed by Wal-Mart in positions ranging from part-time, entry-level hourly employees to salaried managers. The class is estimated to include more than 1.5 million women. Plaintiffs seek injunctive and declaratory relief, backpay, and punitive damages, but not compensatory damages. The district court certified the class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) Rule 23.
Court Certifies 1.5 Million Member Class in Sex Bias Case (pdf).
Finds Common Issues of Fact and Law Support Class Action.
Class actions update: Court certifies largest Employment class action ever (pdf).
On June 21, 2004, a federal court in San Francisco certified
the largest employment class action ever against the worlds
largest employer. Dukes, et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.,
No. C 01-02252 (ND Cal). The class consists of
approximately 1.6 million women who have worked for
Wal-Mart in hourly and salaried managerial positions and
were subject to Wal-Marts pay and management track
promotions policies and practices.
