Popular Press
A $4.5 million Incentive to Avoid the Merits: The Court Hears Oral Argument in CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC
Hamilton and Griffin on Rights
(2016)
Abstract
The oral argument in CRST v. EEOC highlights the damage the Court and the lower courts’ avoidance of the merits in employment discrimination suits have done to Title VII’s enforcement goals. It demonstrates the incentives defendants have to resist the EEOC’s investigative efforts, reject conciliation efforts, and delay and draw out discovery in the hopes of avoiding a decision on the merits. This results in lost efficiency, time, and, most importantly, lost justice. Here, not only did CRST get the case dismissed without a decision on the merits for the most serious claims, but it also was awarded $4.5 million in attorney’s fees.
Disciplines
Publication Date
March 31, 2016
Citation Information
Angela D. Morrison. "A $4.5 million Incentive to Avoid the Merits: The Court Hears Oral Argument in CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. EEOC" Hamilton and Griffin on Rights (2016) Available at: http://works.bepress.com/angela_morrison/41/