Timeline: Chronology of Wal-Mart discrimination case

WASHINGTON Tue Mar 22, 2011 5:46pm EDT

Shopping carts are seen outside a Wal-Mart Supercenter in Coolidge, Arizona December 6, 2010. REUTERS/Joshua Lott

Shopping carts are seen outside a Wal-Mart Supercenter in Coolidge, Arizona December 6, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Joshua Lott

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Supreme Court hears arguments on March 29 in the largest sex-discrimination class-action lawsuit ever as Wal-Mart Stores Inc's female employees seek billions of dollars from the giant retailer.

Here is a chronology of key events in the case:

June 19, 2001: Betty Dukes, a Wal-Mart greeter at a store in Pittsburg, California, and five current or former female employees file a lawsuit in federal court in San Francisco, accusing the retailer of discriminating against its female employees by paying them less than men and giving them fewer promotions.

April 28, 2003: Attorneys for the women filed a motion for class certification and asked the judge to rule the case can go to trial on behalf of all women who worked for Wal-Mart in the United States at any time since December 26, 1998, a group believed to exceed 1.5 million current and former female employees.

June 21, 2004: U.S. District Judge Martin Jenkins ruled the lawsuit can proceed as a nationwide class covering the women who worked at 3,400 stores, but did not decide the merits of the lawsuit.

He proposed a two-stage trial. First, the court would decide if Wal-Mart was liable for intentional sex discrimination. Depending on the verdict, the second stage would decide remedies, such as back pay, punitive damages and injunctive relief requiring pay and promotion changes.

April 26, 2010: A U.S. appeals court based in San Francisco, by a 6-5 vote, upheld the judge's conclusion that it would be better to handle the case as a single group rather than requiring individual lawsuits to be litigated.

August 25, 2010: Wal-Mart appealed to the Supreme Court. It argued claims involving current and former workers, hourly employees and salaried managers and stores across the country were too different to proceed as one class-action lawsuit.

December 6, 2010: The Supreme Court said it would decide whether the class-action certification violated federal rules for such lawsuits, one of the most important employment discrimination class-action cases in decades.

(Reporting by James Vicini, Editing by John Whitesides)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (1)
Hal9King wrote:
Litigates will die of old age and lawyers put their grandkids through college before this is done.

Mar 22, 2011 6:10pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.