United Airlines, Inc. v. McDonald

Until November 7, 1968, United Airlines had a no-marriage rule for stewardesses. Carole Romasanta (Romasanta) (plaintiff), a United stewardess who was terminated for violating the no-marriage rule, filed a Title VII civil-rights class action alleging illegal employment discrimination against United Airlines, Inc. (United) (defendant). Romasanta sought certification on behalf of all United stewardesses who lost their jobs because of the no-marriage rule. The district court declined to certify the class on numerosity grounds after it held that the class would only include stewardesses who lost their jobs due to the rule and who also filed employment-discrimination charges or pursued a grievance under United’s collective-bargaining agreement. The district court then certified its order for interlocutory review, but the court of appeals declined to take the interlocutory appeal. The case proceeded, and the court eventually ruled that the stewardesses were entitled to a remedy. After the parties agreed on remedial amounts, the district court dismissed the case. After learning of the final judgment in Romasanta’s case and the parties’ decision not to appeal, McDonald, a former United stewardess who had lost her job due to the no-marriage rule but who had not filed charges or a grievance, filed a motion to intervene to appeal the district court’s decision not to certify the class. McDonald filed her motion within the time to appeal. The district court denied McDonald’s motion to intervene as untimely, and McDonald appealed. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and found that McDonald’s motion to intervene was timely. United sought a writ of certiorari and argued that the relevant statute of limitations began to run after the district court declined to certify the class, which would have made McDonald’s motion to intervene untimely.