McReynolds v. Sodexho Marriott Servs.
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
349 F. Supp. 2d 1 (2004)
- Written by Joe Cox, JD
Facts
[Editor’s Note: This case is also listed as McReynolds v. Sodexho Marriot Services, Inc.] Cynthia McReynolds (plaintiff), on her behalf and with other plaintiffs, filed suit against her employer, Sodexho Marriott Services (Sodexho) (defendant). The suit alleged that Sodexho was engaging in racial discrimination in the promotion of managers. Not surprisingly, the case became a matter of competing statistical expert witnesses. McReynolds used pool analysis, which consisted of aggregated statistics from the entire company. Those statistics indicated a statistically significant disparity between White and African-American workers regarding promotion rates. Sodexho then argued that the promotion statistics should be divided by the regional vice president (RVP) in charge of a particular group of workers. Sodexho also argued that only nine of the 155 RVP groupings showed statistically significant differences in the promotion of African-American and White workers. The statistics offered by McReynolds created a prima facie showing of a disparate impact, and Sodexho then offered a regression analysis to rebut that initial indication. A regression analysis accounts for multiple factors simultaneously, but McReynolds argued that Sodexho manipulated the study by including the RVP groupings as one factor being considered. Sodexho countered by arguing that the RVP grouping was a major variable significant to the study results. Sodexho moved for summary judgment, arguing that the statistics conclusively rebutted McReynolds’s statistics showing a disparate racial impact.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Huvelle, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 796,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.