University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Roberts v. Texaco, Inc. EE-NY-0165
Docket / Court 7:94-cv-02015 ( S.D.N.Y. )
State/Territory New York
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Private Employment Class Actions
Case Summary
On March 23, 1994, an African-American employee of the Texaco Incorporated filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et. seq., and Section 296 of the New York Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, against Texaco Incorporated in the United ... read more >
On March 23, 1994, an African-American employee of the Texaco Incorporated filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et. seq., and Section 296 of the New York Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, against Texaco Incorporated in the United States District Court of the Southern District of New York.

The plaintiff, represented by private counsel, asked the court for both monetary damages and injunctive relief, alleging that Texaco Incorporated, by certain employment policies and practices, engaged in conduct that had a disparate impact upon and abridged the rights of salaried African-American employees of Texaco in promotions, compensation, and the terms and conditions of their employment, including training and job assignments.

On June 30, 1994, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, adding claims on behalf additional plaintiffs. On May 15, 1995, the plaintiffs moved for class certification.

In August 1996, plaintiffs moved to add Title VII claims to the Class motion. A right-to-sue letter, containing class allegations, was received from the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). Relying thereon, plaintiffs' counsel sought to expand the class beyond the scope of the right-to-sue letter. Texaco opposed, noting that it was seeking reconsideration before the EEOC. On September 27, 1996, the court (Judge Brieant) heard counsel and scheduled a hearing for December 6, 1996 on the class certification motions.

On March 21, 1997, the court (Judge Brieant) approved the class settlement. Roberts v. Texaco, Inc. 1997 U.S. Dist. Westlaw 979 F.Supp. 185 (S.D. NY. 1997). In sum, the settlement provided that:

1. Plaintiffs' counsel receive (a) for legal services rendered prior to the entry of judgment a fee award payable out of the escrow fund (and without interest) upon approval by the Court in the amount of $19,154,144.62 (or 5.5 times the lodestar of $3,482,571.75), plus (b) a further payment out of the escrow fund and covering services to be rendered in the aggregate amount of $1,000,000 payable (without interest) over a five-year period in bi-annual installments, or in such other sum as the Court may direct, upon bi-annual application to and approval by the Court. Attorney's fees amounted to twenty-five percent of the $115 million cash settlement, or $28,750,000.

2. Plaintiff Roberts received, in addition to whatever sums she might receive as a member of the Class or otherwise, the sum of $85,000;

3. Plaintiff Chambers received, in addition to whatever sums he might receive as a member of the Class or otherwise, the sum of $50,000;

4. Plaintiffs Williams, Harris, and Hester received, in addition to whatever sums they might receive as a member of the Class or otherwise, the sum of $25,000; and

5. Plaintiff Shinault received, in addition to whatever sums she might receive as a member of the Class or otherwise, the sum of $2,500.

Defendants' stockholders appealed. On September 14, 1999, the 2nd Circuit (Judge Miner) reversed the judgment of the district court and remanded for the entry of judgment denying counsel fees.

On January 8, 2003, the district court order that the court's supervision on the Settlement Agreement be terminated because it had been fulfilled.

Keri Livingston - 04/01/2008


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Male
Content of Injunction
Discrimination Prohibition
Monitoring
Provide antidiscrimination training
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Retaliation Prohibition
Utilize objective hiring/promotion criteria
Discrimination-area
Hiring
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Pay / Benefits
Promotion
Training
Discrimination-basis
Race discrimination
General
Disparate Treatment
Pattern or Practice
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Private Plaintiff
Race
Black
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
State law
42 U.S.C. § 1981
Defendant(s) Texaco Incorporated
Plaintiff Description All salaried African-American employees of Texaco that were discriminated against in terms of promotions, compensation, and the terms and conditions of their employment, including training and job assignments.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 1997 - 2002
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 ]

  Negotiating Enduring Corporate Change: A Case Study on the Task Force on Equality and Fairness in Roberts v. Texaco Inc.
By: Cathy Cronin-Harris & David M. White (Center for Dispute Resolution)
Citation: (2005)
[ Detail ] [ PDF ] [ 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)
7:94-cv-02015-CLB-MDF (S.D.N.Y.) 12/04/2003
EE-NY-0165-9000.pdf | Detail
General Documents
EEOC Announces Intervention in Texaco, Inc. Lawsuit 11/20/1996
EE-NY-0165-0002.pdf | Detail
Statement By EEOC Chairman Gilbert Casellas On Proposed Settlement Agreement With Texaco 01/03/1997
EE-NY-0165-0001.pdf | Detail
Stipulation and Settlement Agreement 01/23/1997
EE-NY-0165-0003.pdf | Detail
Document Source: District Court
Memorandum Decision [Ordering Consummation of Settlement Agreement] 03/21/1997 (1997 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 23848) (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0165-0005.pdf | LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: LexisNexis
Order [Granting Adoption of Special Master's Report] 07/29/1997 (1997 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 15094) (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0165-0006.pdf | LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: LexisNexis
Order Directing Payment of Settlement Proceeds to Estates of Deceased Class Members and Other Entities 08/13/1997 (1997 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 16823) (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0165-0007.pdf | LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: LexisNexis
Order [Re: Legal Fees] 08/18/1997 (1997 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 16824) (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0165-0008.pdf | LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: LexisNexis
Memorandum and Order [Re: Attorney's Fees] 09/11/1997 (979 F.Supp. 185) (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0165-0004.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Judges Brieant, Charles L. Jr. (S.D.N.Y.)
EE-NY-0165-0005 | EE-NY-0165-0006 | EE-NY-0165-0008
Parker, Barrington Daniels Jr. (S.D.N.Y., Second Circuit)
EE-NY-0165-0007
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers None on record
Defendant's Lawyers None on record
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -