Wisconsin women file regional gender discrimination case against Wal-Mart in wake of Dukes
The Supreme Courts refusal to certify a national gender discrimination class action in its 2011 decision in Dukes v. Wal-Mart has not deterred the women of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. from seeking justice for perceived mistreatment.
February 27, 2013 at 06:15 AM
9 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The Supreme Court's refusal to certify a national gender discrimination class action in its 2011 decision in Dukes v. Wal-Mart has not deterred the women of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. from seeking justice for perceived mistreatment.
On Feb. 20, five Wisconsin women filed a complaint on behalf of workers in Wal-Mart's region 14, which includes parts of Illinois, Indiana and Michigan as well as Wisconsin. The lawsuit accuses the world's largest retailer of denying female employees the equal opportunities and pay to which they are entitled.
“Women at Wal-Mart were told by management that women deserved less pay and fewer promotions than men because men had families to support,” Nichols Kaster Partner Jim Kaster, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.
However, in an omen that does not bode well, on the same day the women filed their complaint, a federal judge in Nashville dismissed a similar lawsuit as untimely. Yet another of these regional lawsuits met its end in October 2012, in Dallas.
Read more at Bloomberg.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of Wal-Mart, see below:
Wal-Mart files complaint against union in attempt to prevent Black Friday protests
Wal-Mart v. Dukes could help Comcast's, Amgen's Supreme Court cases
Wal-Mart hires international compliance chief
Temps file class action against Wal-Mart, workers threaten walkout
Ex-Wal-Mart employee fired for medical marijuana use loses appeal
Wal-Mart gender discrimination case will proceed
The Supreme Court's refusal to certify a national gender discrimination class action in its 2011 decision in Dukes v.
On Feb. 20, five Wisconsin women filed a complaint on behalf of workers in
“Women at
However, in an omen that does not bode well, on the same day the women filed their complaint, a federal judge in Nashville dismissed a similar lawsuit as untimely. Yet another of these regional lawsuits met its end in October 2012, in Dallas.
Read more at Bloomberg.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of
Temps file class action against
Ex-Wal-Mart employee fired for medical marijuana use loses appeal
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
© 2025 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 All
Internal Whistleblowing Surged Globally in 2024, So Why Were US Numbers Flat?
6 minute read
Inside Track: AI Is Sure to Fray Big Law's Devotion to Billable Hour
Trending Stories
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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
