Potter v. Goodwill Industries of Cleveland, 75-1146

Decision Date18 July 1975
Docket NumberNo. 75-1146,75-1146
Parties10 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 1485, 10 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,291 Dorothy POTTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF CLEVELAND, Defendant-Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

Dorothy Potter pro se and Jane M. Picker, Barbara H. Mitchell, Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiff-appellant.

Peter J. Krembs, Ford, Howland, Whitney & Haase, Cleveland, Ohio, for defendant-appellee.

Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, McCREE, Circuit Judge, and FEIKENS *, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from the dismissal of a complaint alleging violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., requires us to determine whether the district court correctly applied to the evidence adduced at trial the shifting burdens of proof articulated by the Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 93 S.Ct. 1817, 36 L.Ed.2d 668 (1973). Specifically we are asked to determine whether a Title VII plaintiff, in order to establish a prima facie case must establish that the wrong allegedly committed was based on an impermissible motivation.

This case arose out of a complaint that appellant was not furnished a stool that she claimed was necessary for her to sit on to perform her job and that she was eventually terminated from her job because of her race which is Negro. At trial plaintiff showed that she was unable to perform her job without a stool because of a physical disability, that she was not able to obtain a stool all of the time, and that a white woman who was also not able to perform a similar job without a stool because of a physical disability was furnished one. She also testified that she was terminated from her job because of her race and because of her political activity, and evidence was adduced that the appellee solicited applicants for the position vacated. She did not, however, adduce direct evidence that because of an impermissible racial motivation the defendant failed to furnish her a stool and terminated her employment.

McDonnell Douglas discloses that a plaintiff who alleges discrimination in conditions of employment must demonstrate, in order to make out a prima facie case, only that he is a member of a class entitled to the protection of Title VII, and that he is accorded treatment different from that accorded persons otherwise similarly situated who are not members of the class. And, in order to make out a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
51 cases
  • Flesch v. Eastern Pa. Psychiatric Institute
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • June 23, 1977
    ...in her employment from persons otherwise similarly situated who are not members of the class. Potter v. Goodwill Industries of Cleveland, 518 F.2d 864, 865 (6th Cir. 1975) (per curiam); see Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII, § 703(a), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Gre......
  • Scott v. University of Delaware
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • June 6, 1979
    ...v. Mobil Oil Corp., 531 F.2d 892 (8th Cir.), Cert. denied, 429 U.S. 848, 97 S.Ct. 135, 50 L.Ed.2d 121 (1976); Potter v. Goodwill Industries, 518 F.2d 864 (6th Cir. 1975).4 The facts pertaining to Scott's employment at the University are ably set forth in detail in the opinion of the distric......
  • Capers v. Long Island RR
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • April 13, 1977
    ...ASM position without legal cause. See McDonnell Douglas v. Green, supra, 411 U.S. at 802, 93 S.Ct. 1817; Potter v. Goodwill Industries of Cleveland, 518 F.2d 864, 865 (6th Cir. 1975); Franklin v. Crosby Type Co. & Int'l. Typo. Union, supra at However, the court finds, when the burden is shi......
  • Flora v. Moore
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Mississippi
    • December 8, 1978
    ...was not for a valid reason; and (4) the defendant continued to seek applicants for the vacant position. Potter v. Goodwill Industries of Cleveland, 518 F.2d 864, 865 (6 Cir. 1975); Peters v. Jefferson Chemical Co., 516 F.2d 447, 449-450 (5 Cir. 1975); Turner v. Texas Instruments, Inc., 555 ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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