abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

29 May 2013

Author:
Victor Li, Litigation Daily (USA)

Another Wal-Mart Sex Bias Class Action Bites the Dust [USA]

Just a couple of months ago it was starting to look like the inexorable passage of time was the greatest threat to the follow-on gender bias class actions filed against Wal-Mart in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Wal-Mart v. Dukes. Judges in Tennessee and Dallas both threw out baby Dukes lawsuits pending in those states, agreeing with Wal-Mart and its lawyers…that the plaintiffs had run out of time to sue. On Friday the plaintiffs in a different regional Dukes spinoff managed to beat Wal-Mart on the time limits issue…U.S. District Judge Barbara Crabb…dismissed class allegations filed by a group of five female Wal-Mart workers, ruling that they couldn't show that their discrimination claims had enough in common to qualify for class treatment.

Part of the following timelines

US judge dismisses gender bias class action lawsuit against Wal-Mart finding that the plaintiffs' do not qualify for class treatment

Walmart lawsuit (re gender discrimination in USA)