University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Warren v. Xerox Corporation EE-NY-0246
Docket / Court 1:01-cv-02909-JG-RER ( E.D.N.Y. )
State/Territory New York
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection IWPR/Wage Project Consent Decree Study
Case Summary
On May 9, 2001, several former and current African-American employees of Xerox filed a lawsuit against the company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, ... read more >
On May 9, 2001, several former and current African-American employees of Xerox filed a lawsuit against the company in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs filed the lawsuit on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, alleging that Xerox engaged in a pattern and practice of racial discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.) and the 1991 Civil Rights Act (42 U.S.C. § 1981a et seq.). Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Xerox (1) assigned black sales employees to inferior sales territories, (2) refused to promote or transfer them to more lucrative territories, (3) denied them commissions they had earned, and (4) retaliated against black sales employees who attempted to assert their civil rights. The plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, back pay, front pay, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorneys' fees.

On March 16, 2007, the parties filed a Proposed Consent Decree, which the Court (Judge John Gleeson) approved via an Order and Final Judgment on September 19, 2008. For the purposes of the settlement, the Court certified a class comprising of "African Americans who are or were employed by Xerox in a Sales Representative position with USCO, XBS or NASG, or their successor organizations, at any time from February 1, 1997 through April 3, 2008 holding a quota-bearing Sales Territory assignment and who are or were part of the commissioned sales workforce."

Under the Consent Decree, Xerox agreed to create a task force comprised of Xerox personnel that was designed to evaluate the existence of racially-based disparities with respect to compensation, assignments, and other work conditions. Subsequently, the task force would draft a list of recommendations, which Xerox would then be required to implement. In addition to providing this injunctive relief, Xerox was required to pay $12 million dollars in monetary relief through the establishment of a settlement fund. Class members received compensatory damages through this fund, and the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees were also paid out of this fund. Likewise, each of the named plaintiffs received incentive awards of $5,000 that were paid out of the Settlement Fund. Under its stated terms, the consent decree remained in effect for three years. The case is now closed.

Jordan Rossen - 01/17/2014


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Content of Injunction
Auditing
Discrimination Prohibition
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Discrimination-area
Demotion
Discipline
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Pay / Benefits
Promotion
Discrimination-basis
Race discrimination
General
Pattern or Practice
Retaliation
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Race
Black
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
42 U.S.C. § 1981
Defendant(s) Xerox Corporation
Plaintiff Description Black current or former sales employees of Xerox filing on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated individuals
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief Attorneys fees
Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 2008 - 2011
Case Closing Year n/a
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)
1:01-cv-2909 (E.D.N.Y.) 12/08/2009
EE-NY-0246-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Proposed Consent Decree 03/16/2007
EE-NY-0246-0001.pdf | Detail
Memorandum and Order (Approving Settlement) 09/19/2008 (2008 WL 4371367) (E.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0246-0003.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Order and Final Judgment 09/19/2008 (E.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0246-0004.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Report & Recommendation 12/08/2009
EE-NY-0246-0005.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Gleeson, John (E.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0246-0001 | EE-NY-0246-0003 | EE-NY-0246-0004
Reyes, Ramon E. Jr. (E.D.N.Y.) [Magistrate]
EE-NY-0246-0005 | EE-NY-0246-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Bradley, Diane (District of Columbia)
EE-NY-0246-0001
Brown, Jeffrey Kevin (New York)
EE-NY-0246-0001
Fraser, Neil (New York)
EE-NY-0246-0001
Ostrove, Frederic (New York)
EE-NY-0246-0001
Weprin, Barry (New York)
EE-NY-0246-0001 | EE-NY-0246-9000
Defendant's Lawyers D'Angelo, Christopher A. (New York)
EE-NY-0246-9000
Ulterino, Eugene D. (New York)
EE-NY-0246-9000
Ventry, Amy L. (New York)
EE-NY-0246-0001 | EE-NY-0246-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -