America has long believed in McDonald’s edict that everything should be “supersized.”1 We will now have a chance to see whether that should also apply to class actions.
On April 26, 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, by a 6-5 vote, opted for the biggest “MAC” possible.2 Six current or former Wal-Mart employees sued the retail giant in 2001, seeking to represent every woman employed at every one of Wal-Mart’s 3,400 stores dating back to 1998, and requesting “injunctive and declaratory relief, back pay, and punitive damages, but not traditional ‘compensatory’ damages.” Such a class would total in excess of 1.5 million women; the class representatives aver that all women who work or have worked in Wal-Mart stores have suffered (and are suffering) from “gender stereotyping and discrimination” with respect to “pay and management track promotions policies and practices.”3
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
