Croker v. Boeing Co.

Summary

The Third Circuit reviewed a class action alleging racial discrimination in employment at Boeing Vertol under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1985. The court held that the appeal was timely because the judgment was not final until the amount of civil-rights attorney’s fees was determined, and it addressed whether purposeful discrimination was required for a § 1981 claim.

Holdings

1. In a civil-rights case, an order is not final for purposes of appeal when the district court has determined entitlement to attorney's fees but has not determined the extent or amount of the fee liability, unless a fund from which the fees will be paid has already been established.
2. Section 1981 does not reach facially neutral conduct merely because it has a racially disparate impact; a plaintiff must prove purposeful racial discrimination. Disparate impact may nevertheless be evidence from which discriminatory intent can be inferred in an unusually stark and unexplainable case.
3. A Title VII classwide disparate-treatment plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that racial discrimination was the employer's standard operating procedure, and the ultimate burden of persuasion remains with the plaintiff even after the employer produces legitimate, nondiscriminatory explanations.
4. For a Title VII disparate-impact claim, the plaintiff must establish substantially disproportionate effects from a facially neutral policy; the employer must then show that the challenged requirement has a manifest relationship to employment, while the plaintiff retains the ultimate burden and may show pretext and a feasible less onerous alternative.
5. An unnamed class member who did not establish jurisdictional prerequisites in his or her own name and did not intervene is not entitled to individual relief when the classwide claim encompassing the individual claim is dismissed.
6. Title VII does not categorically protect losing plaintiffs from an award of costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d); costs may be awarded to a prevailing defendant without the heightened standard applicable to an award of attorney's fees against a Title VII plaintiff, although the district court retains discretion to deny, apportion, or limit costs.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an order resolving the merits but leaving the amount of civil-rights attorney's fees undetermined is a final, appealable order.
2. Whether 42 U.S.C. § 1981 reaches facially neutral employment practices with racially disparate effects without proof of purposeful discrimination.
3. Whether the employees proved a Title VII pattern or practice of racial discrimination in initial placement, promotions, discipline, or harassment.
4. Whether unnamed class-member witnesses may obtain individual relief without intervening after the classwide claims encompassing their individual claims were rejected.
5. Whether a prevailing Title VII defendant may recover costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d) absent a showing that the plaintiff's action was frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation.
6. Whether the district court's cost award was sufficiently specified to permit review and enforcement.

Disposition

other