CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Vera v. Richards

This case addresses a challenge to the 1991 Texas Congressional Redistricting Plan (HB1), specifically regarding allegations of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. Plaintiffs, a group of six Texas voters, argued that various congressional districts, particularly Districts 18, 29, and 30, were drawn with irregular boundaries solely to segregate voters by race. The court found that these three districts indeed exhibited extraordinarily convoluted shapes, which were unexplainable by traditional districting principles and were primarily designed to achieve specific racial compositions for electing minority representatives. The state's arguments, including incumbent protection and Voting Rights Act compliance, were deemed insufficient to justify the racially driven boundaries or to demonstrate narrow tailoring. Consequently, the court declared Congressional Districts 18, 29, and 30 unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment.

RedistrictingRacial GerrymanderingVoting Rights ActEqual Protection ClauseFourteenth AmendmentMajority-Minority DistrictsIncumbency ProtectionCongressional DistrictsShaw v. RenoRacial Segregation
References
34
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Wells v. Hutchinson

Harold Wells, a black man, sued the Texas Agricultural Extension Service (TAES), Panola County, its Commissioners Court, and specific individuals for racial discrimination. Wells alleged he suffered from a segregated employment environment, discriminatory job assignments, promotion denial, lower salary than white counterparts, and retaliatory discharge after complaining about discrimination. The court found that defendants maintained a segregated employment system, intentionally paid Wells less due to his race, and terminated TAES funding in Panola County in retaliation for his discrimination complaints. The court granted Wells declaratory relief, back pay, reinstatement to a non-discriminatory position, county chairman and program leader titles, and an award for costs and attorney's fees, ordering Panola County to resume funding TAES.

Racial DiscriminationEmployment DiscriminationDisparate TreatmentRetaliatory DischargeEqual PayCivil Rights Act of 1964Section 1981Section 1983Panola CountyTexas Agricultural Extension Service
References
109
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Bostick v. Suffolk County

Plaintiff, Theresa C. Bostick, a Black African American woman, sued Suffolk County and several individual defendants alleging discrimination based on race and ethnicity and intentional infliction of emotional distress. She claimed a hostile work environment due to three incidents: a racially insensitive comment by James Perretto in 1997, a derogatory remark by Lowell Sands in 1998 which led to a formal complaint and discipline, and a racially charged comment by Shirley DeMatteo in 1999. Plaintiff also alleged a municipal policy of segregation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The court found the incidents to be sporadic and isolated, not meeting the standard for a hostile work environment. Consequently, the Defendants' motion for summary judgment was granted, dismissing all claims, including those under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, Title VII, New York Human Rights law, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and conspiracy.

Hostile Work EnvironmentRacial DiscriminationSummary Judgment GrantedSection 1981Section 1983Title VII ClaimsEmotional Distress ClaimMunicipal PolicyIndividual LiabilitySuffolk County Employment
References
19
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Broussard v. Schlumberger Well Services

This is a class action lawsuit filed by five Negro employees against Schlumberger Well Services, alleging employment discrimination in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The plaintiffs contended that the defendant's past employment practices, particularly a high school education requirement for promotion into "mainstream" jobs, perpetuated the effects of earlier racial discrimination, locking them into lower-echelon positions. The court found that while the defendant was not currently engaged in discriminatory practices, the facially neutral high school requirement did perpetuate past discrimination for employees hired before the requirement was instituted. The court granted injunctive relief, prohibiting the defendant from reinstituting discriminatory practices and the educational requirement under certain conditions. Damages for back wages were awarded to four of the five plaintiffs, while the claim of Sampson Larry was denied. Plaintiffs were also awarded attorneys' fees. The decision also outlined specific discriminatory practices the defendant was enjoined from reinstituting, such as racially segregated social clubs and restroom facilities. The court distinguished its ruling by applying the precedent set in Griggs v. Duke Power Co., emphasizing the impact of pre-existing discriminatory hiring policies coupled with later educational requirements.

Employment DiscriminationClass ActionRacial DiscriminationTitle VII Civil Rights ActInjunctive ReliefBack WagesEducational RequirementsPromotion DiscriminationHistorical DiscriminationGriggs v. Duke Power Co.
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Smith v. Texaco, Inc.

This Memorandum Opinion addresses a racial discrimination class action lawsuit brought by approximately 200 salaried African-American employees against Star Enterprise and related corporate entities. The plaintiffs allege company-wide discriminatory practices in promotion, compensation, and career advancement, specifically challenging the subjective Performance Management Program (PMP) and the absence of formal job posting systems. The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for class certification under both Rule 23(b)(2) for equitable relief and Rule 23(b)(3) for legal relief, including compensatory and punitive damages. The decision includes provisions for a bifurcated trial structure to ensure Seventh Amendment rights are protected and addresses statute of limitations concerns by applying equitable tolling due to the plaintiffs' reliance on a prior, related class action.

Racial discriminationEmployment discriminationClass actionTitle VIISection 1981Disparate impactDisparate treatmentClass certificationSubjective evaluationPerformance management program
References
63
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Ralph Jones Sheet Metal, Inc.

The court addressed Defendant's motion for summary judgment regarding Plaintiff's Title VII claims of racial discrimination and hostile work environment, alongside claims for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1981(a). Defendant argued the alleged harasser, Kenny Rainey, was not a supervisor, the racial slurs were not severe or pervasive, and the complaint mechanism was not utilized. However, the Court found significant disputed material facts, including Rainey's de facto supervisory authority and the pervasive nature of the racial harassment. Evidence presented by the Plaintiff indicated numerous instances of racial slurs, racial graffiti, and management's inadequate response. Consequently, the Court denied Defendant's motion for summary judgment, determining that genuine issues of fact existed for trial.

Racial DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentTitle VIISummary Judgment DenialSupervisory AuthorityRacial EpithetsEmployee HarassmentEmployer LiabilityAnti-Harassment PolicyUnion Collective Bargaining
References
17
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 02369
Regular Panel Decision
May 02, 2024

IntegrateNYC, Inc. v. State of New York

Plaintiffs, including a youth-led organization, parents, and students, initiated a lawsuit against New York State and City actors, alleging that discriminatory admissions policies in public schools create a "racialized pipeline" that relegates Black and Latinx students to under-resourced and segregated schools. They claim these policies violate their state constitutional rights to a "sound basic education" and equal protection, as well as the New York State Human Rights Law. The Supreme Court dismissed the amended complaint as nonjusticiable. The Appellate Division modified this decision, finding the case justiciable, and denied the motions to dismiss for the Education Article and Equal Protection claims against both State and City, and partially denied dismissal for the NYSHRL claim against the City regarding denial of facilities. However, the NYSHRL claim against the State and the harassment portion of the NYSHRL claim against the City were affirmed for dismissal.

Education LawSchool SegregationEqual Protection ClauseState ConstitutionDiscriminatory AdmissionsStandardized TestingRacial BiasJusticiabilityMotion to DismissAppellate Review
References
25
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Colindres v. QuietFlex Manufacturing

This case involves a lawsuit by present and former Latino employees against QuietFlex Manufacturing Co., L.P., QuietFlex Holding Co., Goodman Manufacturing Co., L.P., and Goodman Holding Co. The plaintiffs allege racial and national origin discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, stemming from alleged segregation of departments, disparate pay, discriminatory language requirements for transfers, and unequal working conditions. They also claim retaliation for a 2000 walkout. The court denied the plaintiffs' motion for class certification for claims seeking classwide punitive damages due to issues of individualized proof and manageability. Additionally, the court denied both the defendants' motion for partial summary judgment on retaliation claims, finding no preclusive effect from an NLRB decision, and the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the integrated enterprise issue, citing disputed facts.

Employment DiscriminationRacial DiscriminationNational Origin DiscriminationRetaliationClass ActionTitle VIISection 1981 Civil RightsFair Labor Standards ActNational Labor Relations ActClass Certification
References
112
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Dec 20, 1974

People ex rel. Price v. Warden of New York City Correctional Institution

The relator, an inmate at the New York City Correctional Institution for Men on Riker's Island, was segregated after an anonymous note indicated a threat to homosexual prisoners. Following an interview and investigation confirming his homosexuality, and his refusal to transfer to segregated housing, he was placed in punitive then administrative segregation. A three-man board hearing preceded his administrative segregation. The court, acknowledging the prison's exigent situation and existing problems within correctional facilities, determined that due process was substantially afforded. Consequently, the Supreme Court, Bronx County's judgment dismissing the relator's petition for a writ of habeas corpus was affirmed.

HomosexualityInmate SegregationPunitive SegregationAdministrative SegregationDue ProcessHabeas CorpusCorrectional FacilitiesRiker's IslandInmate RightsPrison Administration
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Walker v. SBC Services, Inc.

Plaintiff Earnestine Walker sued Defendant SBC Services, Inc. alleging same-sex harassment, racial discrimination, and retaliation under Title VII. The court granted partial summary judgment to SBC, dismissing Walker's same-sex harassment and retaliation claims, finding the harassment not sufficiently severe or pervasive and the retaliation claim conceded. However, the court denied SBC's motion for summary judgment on the racial discrimination (hostile work environment) claim, concluding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the racially charged statements and conduct. The court also denied summary judgment on SBC's Ellerth/Faragher affirmative defenses, concluding that SBC failed to demonstrate it took prompt remedial action. Therefore, the racial discrimination claim and the affirmative defenses proceed to trial.

DiscriminationHarassmentTitle VIISummary JudgmentHostile Work EnvironmentRace DiscriminationSexual HarassmentRetaliationEmployment LawFederal Court
References
31
Showing 1-10 of 428 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational