University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Quarles v. General Investment EE-DC-0047
Docket / Court 1:02-cv-01303-RBW ( D.D.C. )
State/Territory District of Columbia
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Case Summary
On June 28, 2002, four African-Americans filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., against General Investment & Development Co., Windsor Property Management Co., and Windsor Investment Co. in the United States District Court for the ... read more >
On June 28, 2002, four African-Americans filed a lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., against General Investment & Development Co., Windsor Property Management Co., and Windsor Investment Co. in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiffs filed the lawsuit on behalf of themselves and on behalf of a putative class of all African-American persons currently and previously employed by any of the defendant companies.

Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, back pay, punitive and compensatory damages, and attorney's fees, alleging that Defendants had engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination on the basis of race. Specifically, Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants had failed to promote former and current qualified African-American employees in favor of equally or less qualified white employees. Plaintiffs further alleged that Defendants had failed to notify former and current qualified African-American employees of job openings to which equally or less qualified white employees were subsequently appointed.

On September 16, 2002, Defendants filed four separate motions to dismiss concerning: (1) the class action claims; (2) the Title VII claims due to lack of venue; (3) Counts I, II, V, and VI relating to the Title VII claims; and (4) the claims based on the District of Columbia Human Rights Act (DCHRA). On March 10, 2003, the Court (Judge Reggie B. Walton) issued a memorandum opinion in which it concluded that "rulings on defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' class action claims and two of the plaintiffs' District of Columbia Human Right Act claims must be deferred and that defendants' remaining motions should be granted in part and denied in part." Quarles v. Gen. Inv. & Dev. Co., 260 F.Supp.2d 1, 3 (D.D.C. 2003).

The parties reached a confidential settlement agreement, and on April 15, 2003, the court approved the parties' stipulation of dismissal. The court then dismissed with prejudice plaintiffs' individual complaints and dismissed without prejudice plaintiffs' class complaint.

Jordan Rossen - 09/30/2010


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Discrimination-area
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Pay / Benefits
Promotion
Discrimination-basis
Race discrimination
General
Pattern or Practice
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Race
Black
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
Defendant(s) Windsor Property Management Company
Plaintiff Description Four African-American employees of one of three defendant companies, on behalf of themselves and on behalf of a putative class of all African-American persons currently and previously employed by any of the defendant companies.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Unknown
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief Unknown
Source of Relief Unknown
Form of Settlement Private Settlement Agreement
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year 2003
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Megacases, Diversity, and the Elusive Goal of Workplace Reform
Written: Mar. 01, 2008
By: Nancy Levit (University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law)
Citation: 49 B.C. L. Rev. 367 (2008)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Second Generation Employment Discrimination: A Structural Approach
By: Susan Sturm (Columbia Law School)
Citation: 101 Colum. L. Rev. 458 (2001)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
1:02-cv-01303-RBW (D.D.C.) 04/15/2003
EE-DC-0047-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 06/28/2002 (2002 WL 34336809)
EE-DC-0047-0001.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Memorandum Opinion (deferring ruling on motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' class action claims and motion to dismiss two of Plaintiffs' D.C. Human Rights Act claims; granting in part and denying in part remaining motions to dismiss) 03/10/2003 (260 F.Supp.2d 1) (D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0047-0003.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Order (Approving the Parties' Stipulation of Dismissal) 04/15/2003
EE-DC-0047-0002.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Walton, Reggie B. (FISC, D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0047-0002 | EE-DC-0047-0003 | EE-DC-0047-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Alderman, Leslie David III (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0047-9000
Chavers, Clayborne E. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0047-0001 | EE-DC-0047-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Blackwood, David Peter (Maryland)
EE-DC-0047-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -