WUNRN

http://www.wunrn.com

 

Wal-Mart Appeals to U.S. Supreme Court in Bias Case

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has appealed a 6-5 lower court decision allowing women who have worked at Wal-Mart since 2001 to be part of a single class-action lawsuit. Photographer: Davis Turner/Bloomberg

_______________________________________________________________

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/WalMart-Appeals-Sex-law-2982786335.html?x=0&.v=1

 

USA - WAL-MART APPEALS WOMEN'S SEX DISCRIMINATION

CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT TO US SUPREME COURT

 

, August 26, 2010

The nearly 10-year legal battle over the class action lawsuit alleging sex discrimination at Wal-Mart stores is now before the Supreme Court.

Wal-Mart's petition in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes challenging the class certification of more than 1 million female former and current workers was filed Wednesday by Theodore Boutrous Jr., a co-chair of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher's appellate and constitutional law practice. The certification and the claims for monetary damages, he asserts, violate due process and federal rules of civil procedure, and conflict with other circuits and Supreme Court precedents.

"The class certified by the district court was estimated to include over 1.5 million former and current female Wal-Mart employees who held different jobs in different stores in different States under the supervision of different managers," the brief states. "The class is larger than the active-duty personnel in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard combined -- making it the largest employment class action in history by several orders of magnitude ... The majority decision conflicts with every pertinent decision of this Court and many decisions of other circuits on numerous important, recurring issues in class-action litigation, both in discrimination cases and generally."

In a separate statement Boutrous said, "This conflict and confusion in class action law is harmful for everyone -- employers, employees, businesses of all types and sizes, and the civil justice system. These are exceedingly important issues that reach far beyond this particular case and warrant Supreme Court review. We look forward to having the Court consider our petition."

Wal-Mart itself issued a press release emphasizing that the merits of the case have not yet been decided, and defending the company's workplace record. "It is important to remember that the 9th Circuit's opinion dealt only with class certification, not with the merits of the lawsuit," according to the statement. "Walmart is an excellent place for women to work and has been recognized as a leader in fostering the advancement and success of women in the workplace."

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in April in favor of class certification, agreeing with the district court that "it would be better to handle some parts of this case as a class action instead of clogging the federal courts with innumerable individual suits litigating the same issues repeatedly." In dissent, Judge Sandra Ikuta said the class was too large and unwieldy. "On its face, a class action of this sort makes no sense." In another dissent, Judge Alex Kozinski said that with a "kaleidoscope" of supervisors and different work settings, the women in the proposed class "have little in common but their sex and this lawsuit."

The plaintiffs claim that the retail chain, with more than 3,400 U.S. stores and a million employees, has paid women less than men and gives promotions to women less frequently than men, and that the women are similarly situated enough to form a class.

Boutrous declined to say whether the company would try to settle the case, rather than go to trial, if the Court rejects his petition and denies review. "We have all sorts of strong arguments" in favor of the Court granting review, said Boutrous.