No. 21-1523

Wendell Tabb v. Durham Public Schools Board of Education

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-06-03
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: civil-rights civil-rights-act comparator-analysis comparators discrimination eeoc eeoc-charge hishon-v-king-spalding statutory-period title-vii
Latest Conference: 2022-09-28
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. Does Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 mandate trial courts exclude comparators who received a benefit discriminatorily doled out as defined in Hishon v. King & Spalding, 467 U.S. 69 (1984) from its analysis solely because the comparators received such benefit outside the 180-day statutory period for filing an EEOC Charge of Discrimination?

2. Is it ever appropriate to negate FLSA compliance for all school employees whether exempt or non-exempt when the time invested surpasses the minimum workload requirements?

3. Is it constitutionally equitable for school districts that receive federal funding to allow inequalities between exempt and non-exempt employees who perform the same or similar extra duties (i.e.. Theatre Directors and Theatre Technical Directors)?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does Title VII mandate trial courts exclude comparators who received a benefit discriminatorily doled out as defined in Hishon v. King & Spalding from its analysis solely because the comparators received such benefit outside the 180-day statutory period for filing an EEOC Charge of Discrimination?

Docket Entries

2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-07-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-07-05
Brief of respondent Durham Public Schools Board of Education in opposition filed.
2022-05-31
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 5, 2022)

Attorneys

Durham Public Schools Board of Education
Colin Alexander ShiveTharrington Smith, LLP, Respondent
Wendell Tabb
Wendell Tabb — Petitioner