Federal Judge Orders Gender Discrimination Suits Against Walmart to Proceed Individually
On Friday U.S. District Judge Robert Scola Jr. granted the retail giant's motion to sever the plaintiffs' claims in two separate multi-party suits in the Southern District of Florida. Plaintiffs attorney Cathleen Scott has indicated they will proceed with independent litigation for all 79 claimants.
July 16, 2019 at 04:30 PM
4 minute read
Two multi-plaintiff gender discrimination suits against Walmart Stores Inc. in the Southern District of Florida have been ordered to be split to tailor to individual claimants.
U.S. District Judge Robert Scola Jr. issued identical orders on Friday in two lawsuits brought against the company by current and former female employees. Scola granted Walmart's motions to sever the cases and held that “proceeding with this case in its current form would be burdensome for the court and the defendant.”
“The defendant moves for severance arguing that the plaintiffs' claims are 'so individualized that they necessarily implicate different witnesses whose testimony relates only to their unique claims,' ” the judge wrote, noting the plaintiffs “ worked at different stores, in different positions, during different time periods, under different policies, and under different supervisors.”
Scola's order directs the clerk to open individualized cases in the Southern District of Florida for each plaintiff, with the corresponding original lawsuit serving as the first docket entry. The judge also provided a timeline for the 79 collective plaintiffs to file amended complaints with the court, beginning with last names starting with A, B, or C due July 31.
The two cases, Radtka v. Walmart Stores and Price, v. Walmart Stores, were filed in the Southern District of Florida in February. The plaintiffs in Price alleged they were paid less than their male counterparts while working at Walmart stores, while the claimants in Radtka contended they were unfairly compensated and overlooked for promotions because of their sex.
Both complaints charge Walmart with violating multiple provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlaws employment discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex and religion.
Walmart spokesperson Randy Hargrove told the Daily Business Review the company is “pleased the court ended yet another attempt by these lawyers to group dozens of plaintiffs into one suit against us.”
“As we have said, if these plaintiffs believe they have been treated unfairly, they deserve to have their timely, individual claims heard in court — but not in some package the law does not recognize,” Hargrove said in a statement. “The court has laid out a process where each plaintiff can file an individual complaint to hear allegations that are more than 15 years-old. We will thoughtfully address each case as we continue to defend the company.”
|Read Scola's Radtka order:
Employment and civil rights attorney Cathleen Scott is one of the lawyers representing the Price and Radtka plaintiffs. The Scott Wagner and Associates managing partner has represented clients in other gender discrimination suits against Walmart and said that although the Price and Radtka litigants claims were filed together for “judicial economy,” she and her co-counsel intend to proceed with all 79 cases.
“We've been fighting for these women for a decade and we don't plan on stopping anytime soon,” she said. ”It also means instead of taking one deposition of Walmart's corporate representative we're going to take 79 depositions of their corporate representative, so we're going to make good use of our time and resources.”
Scott said the first step will be filing amended complaints tailored to each plaintiff's personalized claims against the retail giant. She admitted the litigation ahead will present a “tall order” for her clients and herself.
“Equal pay is still an issue … and it's a wrong that needs to be righted,” she said.
Scott said she's spoken to “hundreds, if not thousands of women” who've worked at Walmart stores across the country and share similar stories of being denied the same compensation and advancement opportunities as male employees.
“I understand Walmart's goal is to delay this because justice delayed is justice denied in some cases,” Scott said. ”Their stories deserve to be told, and we're going to fight until they get to be told. This is why you become a civil rights lawyer. The road is not easy but it's a worthy one.”
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute read'They Got All Bent Out of Shape:' Parkland Lawyers Clash With Each Other
Courts of Appeal Conflicted Over Rule 1.442(c)(3) When Claims for Damages Involve a Husband and Wife
Families Settle Court Battle Over Who Owns Parkland Killer's Name, Likeness
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 2US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 3Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 4McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
- 5Amazon, SpaceX Press Constitutional Challenges to NLRB at 5th Circuit
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250