From our private database of 28,700+ case briefs...
King v. Acosta Sales & Marketing, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
678 F.3d 470 (2012)
Susan King (plaintiff) was a business manager at Acosta Sales and Marketing, Inc. (Acosta) (defendant) from 2001 to 2007. King sued Acosta under both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Pay Act (EPA), alleging that Acosta impermissibly paid men less than women and that Acosta subjected King to a hostile work environment. King presented a simple table of business managers’ salaries that lists managers’ gender, starting year, starting salary, and 2007 or final salary. Most men started at higher salaries than most women. Every man made more than every woman but one in 2007 or final salary. Acosta acknowledged that King’s sales were comparable to those of a man who made almost triple her salary. Acosta contested, stating that education and experience accounted for the salary differences. King did not graduate from college, but Acosta provided no additional educational evidence. Acosta’s national management set pay scales for positions that included ranges and target medians. Acosta’s general manager, Gary Moe, claimed that he set salaries subjectively and had no explanation for why he did not pay most women even the minimum salary in the nationally recommended pay-scale range for business managers. Acosta argued that Moe’s salary decisions were random rather than discriminatory. The district court granted Acosta’s summary-judgment motion, finding that most of the evidence in King’s hostile-work-environment claim was time barred and that she failed to prove under Title VII and the EPA that the wage gap was sex-based discrimination. King appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Easterbrook, C.J.)
What to do next…
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 546,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 546,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 28,700 briefs, keyed to 984 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.