Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

TALLEY v. LEO J. SHAPIRO & ASSOCS.

April 28, 1989

ARLEAN TALLEY and TIARA STRUBLE, Plaintiffs,
v.
LEO J. SHAPIRO & ASSOCIATES, INC., SURVEY CENTER, INC., GEORGE ROSENBAUM, PHILLIP JOHNSON, and MATTHEW SMITH, Defendants



The opinion of the court was delivered by: BUA

 NICHOLAS J. BUA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:

 Plaintiffs in this action claim that defendants have engaged in a host of racially discriminatory employment practices in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. Defendants, arguing that plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, have moved to dismiss the case pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons stated herein, defendants' motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part.

 FACTS *fn1"

 Plaintiff Arlean Talley is a former employee of defendant Leo J. Shapiro & Associates, Inc. ("Shapiro"), a corporation in the business of collecting, analyzing, and reporting market research data for its clients. Talley worked for Shapiro from October 1981 to October 1986. Plaintiff Tiara Struble was formerly employed by defendant Survey Center, Inc. ("Survey Center"). Struble worked for Survey Center from April 1986 to August 1987. Survey Center, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Shapiro, compiles market survey information for Shapiro. Defendants George Rosenbaum, Phillip Johnson and Matthew Smith were, at all times relevant to this action, corporate officers of both Shapiro and Survey Center.

 In their Third Amended Complaint, plaintiffs, who are black, allege that they were subjected to various acts of racial discrimination during the time they were employed by Shapiro and Survey Center. For example, Struble avers that she was hired at a pay rate less than that paid to white employees in similar positions. Struble, who was responsible for hiring telephone survey workers, also maintains that she was often told by defendants that she was hiring too many blacks. Talley and Struble further claim that over the past several years defendants have engaged in widespread racially discriminatory employment practices which have denied equal employment opportunities to blacks. Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint contains a long list of these discriminatory employment practices, which include:

 
A. Denying qualified black persons equal opportunity to employment in all positions;
 
B. Maintaining a promotion system which locks black persons into discriminatory assignments and which denies them equal opportunity for promotion;
 
* * * *
 
E. Providing medical benefits to employees on the basis of race;
 
* * * *
 
G. Disciplining (sic) black persons on a discriminatory basis by stringently applying rules and regulations to them, while ignoring and waiving such rules and regulations with respect to white persons;
 
* * * *
 
L. Laying off, and discharging black employees on a ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.