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
Key Terms:
EmploymentDiscrimina
Latest Conference: 2022-09-28
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?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 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)? cert

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