Dukes v. Wal–mart Stores Inc.

Decision Date23 September 2011
Docket NumberNos. 04–16688,04–16720.,s. 04–16688
Citation659 F.3d 801,113 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 928
PartiesBetty DUKES; Patricia Surgeson; Edith Arana; Karen Williamson; Deborah Gunter; Christine Kwapnoski; Cleo Page, Plaintiffs–Appellees,v.WAL–MART STORES, INC., Defendant–Appellant.Betty Dukes; Patricia Surgeson; Edith Arana; Karen Williamson; Deborah Gunter; Christine Kwapnoski; Cleo Page, Plaintiffs–Appellants,v.Wal–Mart Stores, Inc., Defendant–Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

OPINION TEXT STARTS HEREDebra Gardner, Baltimore, MD, Jocelyn Dion Larkin, Brad Seligman, The Impact Fund, Berkeley, CA, Shauna I. Marshall, Esquire, Hastings College of the Law, Steven Louis Stemerman, Esquire, Elizabeth Ann Lawrence, Esquire, Davis Cowell & Bowe, LLP, Noreen Ann Farrell, Esquire, Arcelia Hurtado, Equal Rights Advocates, San Francisco, CA, Joseph Sellers, Christine E. Webber, Partner, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC, Washington, DC, Stephen E. Tinkler, Esquire, Tinker & Bennett, Merit Bennett, The Bennett Firm, Santa Fe, NM, for PlaintiffsAppellees.Nancy Lula Abell, Esquire, Paul Grossman, Esquire, Paul Hastings LLP, Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., Esquire, Gail Ellen Lees, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Barbara L. Johnson, Neal Mollen, Paul Hastings LLP, Washington, DC, Katherine Consuelo Huibonhoa, Paul Hastings LLP, Mark Andrew Perry, Counsel, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, CA, for DefendantAppellant.On Remand from the United States Supreme Court. D.C. No. CV–01–02252–MJJ.Before: ALEX KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, STEPHEN REINHARDT, PAMELA ANN RYMER, MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS, BARRY G. SILVERMAN, SUSAN P. GRABER, RAYMOND C. FISHER, RICHARD A. PAEZ, MARSHA S. BERZON, CARLOS T. BEA and SANDRA S. IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

We remand to the district court to comply with the United States Supreme Court's decision in Wal–Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, ––– U.S. ––––, 131 S.Ct. 2541, 180 L.Ed.2d 374 (2011).

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • U.S. v. Fitch
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • September 23, 2011
  • Glaberson v. Comcast Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • November 12, 2013
    ...instruction: "We remand to the district court to comply with the United States Supreme Court's decision . . ." Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 659 F.3d 801 (9th Cir. 2011). Thereafter, plaintiffs sought leave to file a fourth amended complaint, in which they redefined the proposed class, re......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT