[IPAC-List] Ricci v. DeStefano

Richard.Arwood richard.arwood at comcast.net
Sat Jan 10 17:40:40 EST 2009

Thanks very much......Interesting, and perhaps monumental!


Richard Arwood, retired Fire Chief (Memphis)
Collierville, TN 38017

-----Original Message-----
From: Lance Seberhagen [mailto:sebe at erols.com]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 9:54 PM
To: Richard.Arwood
Cc: 'Dettling, Aaron'; IPAC-List at ipacweb.org
Subject: Re: [IPAC-List] Ricci v. DeStefano

Here is a quick summary of the case that is now before the U.S. Supreme

The City of New Haven, CT, gave promotional exams (written and oral) for
Fire Lieutenant and Fire Captain. The exams were developed on the basis
of content validity by an outside consultant (I/O Solutions,
Westchester, IL). The City decided not to certify the results because
the exams had an adverse impact against blacks. White and Hispanic
applicants who would have been promoted then filed a discrimination
complaint under Title VII and the Equal Protection clause. Two major
issues are:

1. Is it discriminatory for an employer to reject the results of a
content-valid exam because the exam has an adverse impact?

2. When employers reject tests that have an adverse impact, do they
violate the provision of Title VII that prohibits employers from
adjusting scores, using different cutoffs, or otherwise altering the
results of employment tests on the basis of race?


Lance Seberhagen, Ph.D.
Seberhagen & Associates
9021 Trailridge Ct
Vienna, VA 22182
Tel 703-790-0796

Richard.Arwood wrote:

>Did I miss something? What is this case about?





>Richard Arwood, retired Fire Chief (Memphis)

>Collierville, TN 38017



>-----Original Message-----

>From: ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org [mailto:ipac-list-bounces at ipacweb.org]

>On Behalf Of Dettling, Aaron

>Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 3:41 PM

>To: IPAC-List at ipacweb.org

>Subject: [IPAC-List] Ricci v. DeStefano


>The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the Ricci case today.




>ET AL. V. DeSTEFANO, JOHN, ET AL. The petitions for writs of certiorari are

>granted. The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for

>oral argument. The brief of petitioners is to be filed on or before

>Thursday, February 19, 2009. The brief of respondents is to be filed on or

>before Wednesday, March 18, 2009. A reply briefs, if any, is to be filed in

>accordance with Rule 25.3 of the Rules of this Court.



>Aaron L. Dettling

>Balch & Bingham LLP

>1901 Sixth Avenue North, Suite 1500

>Birmingham, Alabama 35203-4642

>(205) 226-8723 - Phone

>(205) 488-5699 - Fax

>Download vCard<http://www.balch.com/people/vcard.cfm?id=157>


>IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Unless explicitly stated to the contrary, this

>communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be

>used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under

>the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to

>another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. Click here for






>CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This email and any attachments may be confidential


>protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be

>aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the e-mail or


>attachment is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please

>notify us immediately by replying to the sender and deleting this copy and

>the reply from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.




More information about the IPAC-List mailing list