|
|
![]() |
Sample Cases
Sexual harassment and sexual discrimination in promotions: Bogan v. Fleetwood Enterprises (U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho). This was a class action involving claims of nationwide sex discrimination and sexual harassment. It was settled for structural changes in the company’s systems for dealing with harassment and with promotions. I handled this case while I was with Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP. Racial harassment: Brewer v. Miller Brewing Co. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York). In this case, 97 former black employees harmed by co-worker racial harassment shared a $2.7 million settlement. Racial harassment: Dowdell v. Ona Corp. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama). In this case, 142 former black employees harmed by co-worker racial harassment shared a $2.5 million settlement. Sexual and racial discrimination in hiring and promotions: Payne v. Travenol Laboratories, Inc. (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit). This case went to trial on claims of classwide race and sex discrimination in hiring and initial assignment, classwide sex discrimination in initial assignments and in promotion, sex discrimination in imposing a mandatory six-month maternity leave on female employees, and racial discrimination in failing to give retroactive seniority to black employees who were previously discriminated against in hiring. The case was settled for changes in company practices. The class shared $1.1 million in back pay and a number of jobs made available to them as part of the settlement. Racial discrimination in promotional tests: Edwards v. City of Houston (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit). This case was settled in 1993, but intervenors came into the case and fought the settlement for about ten years. The class action settlement provided 106 remedial promotions to African-American and Hispanic police officers harmed by discriminatory promotional tests. The case was so hard-fought that we had five oral arguments in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. One of the arguments was en banc, with all 17 judges participating. My clients kept all their relief. Sexual discrimination in initial job assignments, and promotions: Kohne v. Imco Container Company (U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia). This was a small sex discrimination class action for women working at a plastic bottle manufacturing and decorating plant in Harrisonburg, Virginia. The court found that the company had discriminated against women in initial assignments and in promotions. The case was settled in 1981 for $ 210,000 in back pay and interest, and changes in company practices. Racial discrimination in hiring and promotions: Lewis v. Bloomsburg Mills (U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that there was racial discrimination against black applicants at a South Carolina textile mill, and sent the promotion issues back to the trial court for a new look. The case was eventually settled. The decision on appeal is one of the most ringing reversals of findings of nondiscrimination I have yet seen; it is reported at 773 F.2d 561 (4th Cir. 1985); Racial discrimination in hiring test: Luevano v. Campbell (U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia). This was one of the biggest cases on record. The settlement knocked out the Federal government’s nationwide hiring test for 118 professional, technical, and administrative occupational series. Over 150,000 applicants a year had taken the test, and the Federal government used to hire 6,000 to 8,000 test-takers a year. The Consent Decree established standards for developing their replacements. Many other attorneys and organizations also worked on this case. There are many more cases, but these should be enough to give the flavor of my cases. |
|
By transmitting information through this site, or by allowing you to receive such information, the firm and I are not rendering legal advice or providing legal services. The availability of this site is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship between us, and no such relationship is created merely by your accessing, browsing through, or sending e-mail through the pages of the site. Forming an attorney-client relationship requires direct individual communication and agreement between attorney and client, and I will represent only a small percentage of the people contacting me for representation. Site Map | © 2007 - Original Content Copyright The Law Office of Richard T. Seymour, P.L.L.C., ATLA Content Copyright Association of Trial Lawyers of America. |