Richardson v. Pennsylvania Dept. of Health, No. 76-2263

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
Writing for the CourtDavid Max Baer, Norman J. Watkins; Before GIBBONS, MARIS and HUNTER; GIBBONS
Citation561 F.2d 489
Parties15 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 606, 14 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 7800 Lanceda RICHARDSON, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Appellant, v. The PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Leonard Bachman, M. D., Individually and in his capacity as Secretary of Health of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Morton D. Rosen, Individually and in his capacity as Deputy Secretary for Administration of the Department of Health, Milton J. Shapp, Individually and in his capacity as Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Ernest P. Kline, Individually and in his capacity as the Lieutenant Governor of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, James Wade, Individually and in his capacity as Secretary of the Governor's Office of Administration, Samuel Begler, Individually and in his capacity as Director of the Bureau of Personnel, John McCarthy and C. Herschel Jones, Individually and in their capacity as Commissioners for the Pennsylvania State Civil Service Commission, and Richard C. Rosenberry, Individually and in his capacity as Executive Director of the Pennsylvania State Civil Service Commission.
Decision Date16 August 1977
Docket NumberNo. 76-2263

Page 489

561 F.2d 489
15 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 606, 14 Empl. Prac.
Dec. P 7800
Lanceda RICHARDSON, Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Appellant,
v.
The PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Leonard Bachman, M.
D., Individually and in his capacity as Secretary of Health
of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Morton D. Rosen,
Individually and in his capacity as Deputy Secretary for
Administration of the Department of Health, Milton J. Shapp,
Individually and in his capacity as Governor of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Ernest P. Kline, Individually
and in his capacity as the Lieutenant Governor of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, James Wade, Individually and
in his capacity as Secretary of the Governor's Office of
Administration, Samuel Begler, Individually and in his
capacity as Director of the Bureau of Personnel, John
McCarthy and C. Herschel Jones, Individually and in their
capacity as Commissioners for the Pennsylvania State Civil
Service Commission, and Richard C. Rosenberry, Individually
and in his capacity as Executive Director of the
Pennsylvania State Civil Service Commission.
No. 76-2263.
United States Court of Appeals,
Third Circuit.
Argued May 5, 1977.
Decided Aug. 16, 1977.

Page 490

David Kraut, Mark B. Segal, Community Legal Services, Inc., Philadelphia, Pa., for appellant.

David Max Baer, Norman J. Watkins, J. Justin Blewitt, Jr., Deputy Attys. Gen., Chief, Civ. Litigation, Robert P. Kane, Atty. Gen., Pa. Dept. of Justice, Harrisburg, Pa., for appellees.

Before GIBBONS, MARIS and HUNTER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

GIBBONS, Circuit Judge:

This is an appeal from an order of the district court granting defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint of Lanceda Richardson against certain officials of the Pennsylvania Health Department for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). We reverse.

Richardson, a black woman, filed a complaint on her own behalf and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, 1 alleging that in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and § 1983 and of the fourteenth amendment she had been improperly discharged from her employment. 2 The defendants are state officers responsible for personnel policies and practices of the Pennsylvania Department of Health. Richardson charges that defendants' practice of using Pennsylvania civil service exam No. 08493 (the "exam") for testing and ranking job applicants for the positions of Laboratory II and Laboratory III Technicians violates her constitutional rights. She alleges that the exam had a discriminatory racial impact on minority job applicants and that the exam was not job-related.

On October 27, 1965, Richardson was given a provisional appointment as a Laboratory Technician II within the Pennsylvania Health Department. Under Pennsylvania law "(a) provisional appointment shall continue only until an appropriate eligible list can be established and certification made therefrom." 71 P.S. § 741.604 (Supp.1976). After several unsuccessful attempts to establish an eligibility list, the State Civil Service Commission established one in the spring of 1975. Richardson competed in the examination which was used to create this eligibility list, and, in fact, was placed on the list. Pennsylvania law, however, requires that only the three highest ranking individuals on the eligibility list be certified for appointment to the position. See 71 P.S. § 741.601 (Supp.1976). As Richardson was not one of the top three persons on the list of eligibles she was not certified, and on May 13, 1975, her provisional appointment was terminated.

In her complaint charging that the exam was invalid Richardson alleges: (1) that during her nine and one-half year employment with the Health Department her performance as a Laboratory Technician II was constantly evaluated by her superiors as "Very Good"; (2) that the exam has not been validated to predict success on the job of Laboratory Technician II and III with a reasonable degree of accuracy; (3) that the use of the exam to determine hiring for the position of Laboratory Technician II and III violates 29 C.F.R. § 1607, a regulation of the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; and (4) that the exam has a discriminatory impact on minority applicants in that proportionately fewer minority applicants pass than do whites. The complaint also alleges:

Page 491

18. The defendants knew or reasonably should have known that the use of this Laboratory Technician II and Laboratory Technician III civil service examination to determine hiring for the job in which plaintiff was engaged, would violate her constitutional rights.

20. Despite their knowledge that the examination for Laboratory Technician II and Laboratory Technician III was not job-related and not validated to predict with a reasonable degree of accuracy success on the job in which plaintiff was engaged and despite their knowledge that the named plaintiff had successfully performed her job for 91/2 years, the defendants, acting in bad faith, or with reckless disregard for the named plaintiff's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 practice notes
  • Gay v. WAITERS'AND DAIRY LUNCHMEN'S UNION, LOCAL NO. 30, No. C-73-0489-WWS.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Northern District of California
    • February 6, 1980
    ...Black Firefighters of Norfolk v. Hirst, 604 F.2d 844, 848 (4th Cir. 1979); see also Richardson v. Pennsylvania Department of Health, 561 F.2d 489 (3d Cir. 1977); but see Resident Advisory Board v. Rizzo, 564 F.2d 126, 140-145 (3d Cir. 1977), aff'g 425 F.Supp. 987, 1024 (E.D.Pa.1976), cert. ......
  • Dickerson v. United States Steel Corp., Civ. A. No. 73-1292
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • August 2, 1978
    ...S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d 396 (1977). Recent decisions of circuit courts also support this conclusion. Richardson v. Penna. Dept. of Health, 561 F.2d 489 (3d Cir. 1977); Rule v. Int'l Association of Bridge Workers, 568 F.2d 558 (8th Cir. 1977); Davis v. County of Los Angeles, 566 F.2d 1334 (9t......
  • Dietz v. Baker, Civ. No. 06-256-SLR.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Delaware
    • December 13, 2007
    ...an invidious discriminatory purpose may often be inferred from the totality of relevant facts" Richardson v. Pennsylvania Dept. of Health, 561 F.2d 489, 492 (3d Cir.1977). Under strict scrutiny, the government may treat people differently based on their race, but only for the most compellin......
  • Walker v. Robbins Hose Co. No. 1, Inc., Civ. A. No. 74-172.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Delaware
    • February 8, 1979
    ...is unnecessary or like § 1983.30 The question remains open in the Third Circuit also. See Richardson v. Pennsylvania Department of Health, 561 F.2d 489, 493 (C.A.3, 1977). A few courts have held that a showing of disparate impact will suffice without more to establish a prima facie case of ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
20 cases
  • Delgado v. McTighe, Civ. A. No. 76-1206.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • December 1, 1977
    ...242, 96 S.Ct. 2040; Resident Advisory Board v. Rizzo, 564 F.2d 126, 140 (3d Cir. 1977); Richardson v. Pennsylvania Department of Health, 561 F.2d 489, 492, (3d Cir. The State Board of Law Examiners Not a "Person" Within the Meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Defendants' second contention is that ......
  • Milburn v. Girard, Civ. A. No. 75-3322.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • November 18, 1977
    ...1181 (E.D.Pa. 1977); Johnson v. Hoffman, 424 F.Supp. 490, 494 (E.DMo.1977). See also Richardson v. Pennsylvania Department of Health, 561 F.2d 489, 493 (3d Cir. 1977) (noting, but not deciding, the issue). Although the complaint, as amended, sufficiently alleges intentional discrimination o......
  • Dickerson v. United States Steel Corp., Civ. A. No. 73-1292
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
    • August 2, 1978
    ...S.Ct. 1843, 52 L.Ed.2d 396 (1977). Recent decisions of circuit courts also support this conclusion. Richardson v. Penna. Dept. of Health, 561 F.2d 489 (3d Cir. 1977); Rule v. Int'l Association of Bridge Workers, 568 F.2d 558 (8th Cir. 1977); Davis v. County of Los Angeles, 566 F.2d 1334 (9t......
  • Larry P. v. Riles, C-71-2270 RFP.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Northern District of California
    • October 16, 1979
    ...Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied 434 U.S. 1064, 98 S.Ct. 1240, 55 L.Ed.2d 765 (1977). Cf. Richardson v. Pennsylvania Department of Health, 561 F.2d 489 (3d Cir. 1977). The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, has evidently adopted a more stringent test for intent, requiring a "determinatio......
  • 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