Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
02-30960•EEOC v. K & B Louisiana Corp
02-30960Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit16.09.2003
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
September 16, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
In the
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
_______________
m 02-30960
_______________
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff-Counter Defendant-
Appellee-Cross-Appellant,
VERSUS
K&B LOUISIANA CORPORATION,
DOING BUSINESS AS RITE AID CORPORATION,
Defendant-Counter Claimant-
Appellant-Cross-Appellee.
_________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
m 00–CV–2238
_________________________
Before JOLLY, SMITH, and
EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The EEOC sued, alleging that K&B Louisi-
ana Corporation engaged in unlawful discrim-
ination for failing to rehire Johnny Williams on
the basis of her sex. After a bench trial, the
court ruled that K&B had engaged in an un-
lawfulemployment practice, refused injunctive
relief, and ordered each side to bear its own
costs and attorney’s fees. K&B appeals on
various grounds, including its assertion that
there was no direct evidence of discrimination;
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has de-
termined that this opinion should not be published
and is not precedent except under the limited cir-
cumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
K&B also seeks fees and costs. The EEOC
cross-appeals the decision not to award
injunctive relief.
We have read the briefs and pertinent por-
tions of the record and have heard the
arguments of counsel, and have consulted the
applicable caselaw. We find no reversible
error. There was certainly direct evidence of
sex-based discrimination, including an
admission by K&B’s manager that he preferred
to hire men for a particular post.
Consequently, the EEOC did not have to
prove that Williams was qualified. The district
court was well within its discretion in declining
injunctive relief. The court’s refusal to shift
costs or attorneys fees is a fair resolution of
this matter, which badly needs to be put to
rest.
The judgment is AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.