Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Impact Of Wal-Mart V. Dukes On Employment Discrimination Class Actions Five Years Out: A Forecast That Suggests More Of A Wave Than A Tsunami, Suzette M. Malveaux
The Impact Of Wal-Mart V. Dukes On Employment Discrimination Class Actions Five Years Out: A Forecast That Suggests More Of A Wave Than A Tsunami, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
A Diamond In The Rough: Trans-Substantivity Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And Its Detrimental Impact On Civil Rights, Suzette Malveaux
A Diamond In The Rough: Trans-Substantivity Of The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure And Its Detrimental Impact On Civil Rights, Suzette Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
(In)Competence In Appellate And District Court Brief Writing On Rule 12 And 56 Motions, Scott A. Moss
(In)Competence In Appellate And District Court Brief Writing On Rule 12 And 56 Motions, Scott A. Moss
Publications
No abstract provided.
The Power And Promise Of Procedure: Examining The Class Action Landscape After Wal-Mart V. Dukes, Suzette M. Malveaux
The Power And Promise Of Procedure: Examining The Class Action Landscape After Wal-Mart V. Dukes, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
The Jury (Or More Accurately The Judge) Is Still Out For Civil Rights And Employment Cases Post-Iqbal, Suzette M. Malveaux
The Jury (Or More Accurately The Judge) Is Still Out For Civil Rights And Employment Cases Post-Iqbal, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
Plausibility Pleading And Employment Discrimination, Suzette M. Malveaux
Plausibility Pleading And Employment Discrimination, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
How Goliath Won: The Future Implications Of Dukes V. Wal-Mart, Suzette M. Malveaux
How Goliath Won: The Future Implications Of Dukes V. Wal-Mart, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
Civil Rights And Systemic Wrongs, Melissa Hart
Civil Rights And Systemic Wrongs, Melissa Hart
Publications
Systemic employment discrimination is a structural, social harm whose victims include not only those who can be specifically identified, but also many who cannot. Pattern and practice claims in employment litigation are an essential tool for challenging this structural harm. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court's decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes brushes aside the systemic nature of the plaintiffs' claims, making both theoretical and doctrinal mistakes in its application of the procedural and substantive law applicable in employment discrimination class action litigation. The most troubling part of the Court's opinion--its rejection of statistical modeling for remedial determinations--has received little attention. This article …
Class Actions At The Crossroads: An Answer To Wal-Mart V. Dukes, Suzette M. Malveaux
Class Actions At The Crossroads: An Answer To Wal-Mart V. Dukes, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
The Supreme Court has recently decided to hear argument in the largest private-employer civil rights case in American history, Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. This historic case involves up to 1.5 million women suing Wal-Mart, one of the largest companies in the world, for alleged gender discrimination in pay and promotions, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Like many employees who challenge companywide employment discrimination, the plaintiffs in Dukes brought their case as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and sought injunctive and declaratory relief, …
Clearing Civil Procedure Hurdles In The Quest For Justice, Suzette M. Malveaux
Clearing Civil Procedure Hurdles In The Quest For Justice, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
No abstract provided.
Is It The "Real Thing"? How Coke's One-Way Binding Arbitration May Bridge The Divide Between Litigation And Arbitration, Suzette M. Malveaux
Is It The "Real Thing"? How Coke's One-Way Binding Arbitration May Bridge The Divide Between Litigation And Arbitration, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
Although the scholarly literature is replete with discussion of the pros and cons of mandatory arbitration and civil litigation, relative to one another, there has been no examination of one-way binding arbitration as a potential bridge between these procedural poles. The goal of this article is to fill that void. One-way binding arbitration requires an employee to use arbitration to resolve workplace disputes, but also gives the employee, but not the employer, the option of rejecting the arbitrator’s decision. In the event the employee is not satisfied with the outcome of arbitration, she can still pursue her claim in court. …
Procedural Extremism: The Supreme Court's 2008-2009 Labor And Employment Cases, Melissa Hart
Procedural Extremism: The Supreme Court's 2008-2009 Labor And Employment Cases, Melissa Hart
Publications
It has become nearly a commonplace to say that the Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts is a court of “incrementalism.” The 2008 Term, however, featured several opinions that showcase the procedural extremism of the current conservative majority. In a series of sharply divided decisions, the Court re-shaped the law that governs the workplace - or more specifically the law that governs whether and how employees will be permitted access to the courts to litigate workplace disputes. At least as important as the Court’s changes to the substantive legal standards are the procedural hurdles the five …
Fighting To Keep Employment Discrimination Class Actions Alive: How Allison V. Citgo's Predomination Requirement Threatens To Undermine Title Vii Enforcement, Suzette M. Malveaux
Fighting To Keep Employment Discrimination Class Actions Alive: How Allison V. Citgo's Predomination Requirement Threatens To Undermine Title Vii Enforcement, Suzette M. Malveaux
Publications
The Civil Rights Act of 1991, which provides compensatory and punitive damages and attendant jury trials in cases alleging intentional discrimination, was designed to enhance enforcement and expand remedies. Its enactment, however, has triggered a schism among the circuit courts over what the proper standard is for determining whether monetary damages or injunctive relief predominates, a necessary inquiry for determining whether plaintiffs are entitled to class certification for Title VII claims under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Led by the Fifth Circuit, some federal appeals courts contend that monetary relief predominates unless it is “incidental,” and …