Judge Approves $24 Million Walgreen Settlement
U.S. District Judge G. Patrick Murphy approved a $24 million settlement in a federal lawsuit accusing Walgreen Co. of racial bias.Roughly 10,000 past and present ...
March 20, 2008 at 07:14 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
U.S. District Judge G. Patrick Murphy approved a $24 million settlement in a federal lawsuit accusing Walgreen Co. of racial bias.
Roughly 10,000 past and present black Walgreen workers will split $20 million under the consent decree Murphy approved March 24. Attorneys involved in the case will share about $4.5 million in fees separate from the settlement amount.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed the lawsuit in March 2007, accusing the Deerfield, Ill.-based retailer of discriminating against thousands of black workers in hiring and assignment decisions. The lawsuits allege Walgreen assigns black managers, management trainees and pharmacists to low-performing stores and to stores in black communities, and denies them promotions based on race.
The settlement resolves the EEOC's litigation and a private class-action lawsuit filed in June 2005 on behalf of 14 current and former black Walgreen workers. Those cases were consolidated in April 2007.
Click here to read a 7th Circuit article covering one of the discrimination lawsuits against Walgreen.
Walgreen denied any wrongdoing. “We do not tolerate discrimination in any aspect of employment,” spokeswoman Tiffani Bruce said in a statement.
The decree also requires Walgreen to hire outside consultants to review and make recommendations about the chain's employment practices, including standardized, nondiscriminatory promotions, promotional benchmarks, store assignments and procedures.
U.S. District Judge G. Patrick Murphy approved a $24 million settlement in a federal lawsuit accusing
Roughly 10,000 past and present black Walgreen workers will split $20 million under the consent decree Murphy approved March 24. Attorneys involved in the case will share about $4.5 million in fees separate from the settlement amount.
The U.S.
The settlement resolves the EEOC's litigation and a private class-action lawsuit filed in June 2005 on behalf of 14 current and former black Walgreen workers. Those cases were consolidated in April 2007.
Click here to read a 7th Circuit article covering one of the discrimination lawsuits against Walgreen.
Walgreen denied any wrongdoing. “We do not tolerate discrimination in any aspect of employment,” spokeswoman Tiffani Bruce said in a statement.
The decree also requires Walgreen to hire outside consultants to review and make recommendations about the chain's employment practices, including standardized, nondiscriminatory promotions, promotional benchmarks, store assignments and procedures.
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 AllLululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
Trending Stories
- 1Commission Confirms Three of Newsom's Appellate Court Picks
- 2Judge Grants Special Counsel's Motion, Dismisses Criminal Case Against Trump Without Prejudice
- 3GEICO, Travelers to Pay NY $11.3M for Cybersecurity Breaches
- 4'Professional Misconduct': Maryland Supreme Court Disbars 86-Year-Old Attorney
- 5Capital Markets Partners Expect IPO Resurgence During Trump Administration
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