Arthur Perkins v. Lake County Department of Utilities

860 F. Supp. 1262 (1994)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Arthur Perkins v. Lake County Department of Utilities

United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
860 F. Supp. 1262 (1994)

Facts

Arthur Perkins (plaintiff) worked for the Lake County Department of Utilities (department) (defendant). Perkins sued the department in federal court, alleging that the department violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discriminating against Perkins in the workplace based on Perkins’s status as an American Indian. Specifically, Perkins alleged that he was subjected to derogatory racial comments, not permitted to work overtime, and denied promotions for which he was qualified. The department moved for summary judgment, arguing in part that Perkins was not an American Indian and consequently could not claim protection under Title VII. The department presented evidence that Perkins’s family ancestry, as traced through government records, showed that he was White, not American Indian. Additionally, neither Perkins nor his close family members were enrolled as members of the Cherokee Nation, the tribe with which Perkins claimed affiliation. However, Perkins submitted affidavits from family members affirming that the Perkins family claimed American Indian heritage. He also presented evidence from a social worker from the North American Indian Cultural Center, who stated that Perkins’s facial structure and complexion supported that he was an American Indian. Also, it was undisputed that regardless of Perkins’s ancestry, he represented himself as an American Indian throughout his employment with the department and that, until the suit was filed, the department treated that representation as accurate. The court considered the evidence to determine whether to grant the department’s motion for summary judgment.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Perelman, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership