Date: 12-29-1999

Case Style: Connie Marion v. The Slaughter Company

Case Number: 98-6286

Judge: Stephen H. Anderson

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Plaintiff's Attorney: Tamara L. Gowens of Hammons & Associates, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma and Steven M. Angel, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Defendant's Attorney: Kyle L. Buchanan, Jim T. Priest, and Debra B. Cannon of McKinney & Stringer, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma

Description: Connie Marion ("plaintiff") brought this Title VII(1) action(2) against The Slaughter Company, a division of R.E. Phelon Co., Inc. ("TSC"), alleging gender-based job and wage discrimination. The case went to trial on the issue of disparate treatment. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury returned a verdict against the plaintiff, answering "no" to the following question on the verdict form: "Has plaintiff Connie Marion proved that her sex was, more likely than not, a motivating factor in establishing her rate of pay?" Appellant's App. at 68. Subsequently, the plaintiff filed post-trial motions for judgment as a matter of law and seeking a determination in equity by the court that despite the absence of intentional discrimination, the gender distribution in TSC's work force violated Title VII under a disparate impact theory. The district court ruled that neither the pleadings, the law, nor the evidence supported a disparate impact claim, and it denied relief on the plaintiff's post-trial motions.

On appeal, the plaintiff contends that the district court erred by failing to rule that the gender composition of the departments in question constituted a per se violation of Title VII, and by failing to hold or to instruct the jury that the gender distribution in the workforce amounted to a facially neutral policy having a prohibited disparate impact. The plaintiff seeks either outright reversal and entry of judgment in her favor, or a new trial. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome: Affirmed.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unknown

Defendant's Experts: Unknown

Comments: Reported by Kent Morlan