McReynolds v. Sodexho Marriott Servs.

349 F. Supp. 2d 1 (2004)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

McReynolds v. Sodexho Marriott Servs.

United States District Court for the District of Columbia
349 F. Supp. 2d 1 (2004)

JC

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…

  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 796,000 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
  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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 796,000 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
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 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