Legal Opinion
Arndt v. City of Colorado Springs
District Court, D. Colorado
Decided July 12, 2017No. Civil Action No. 15-cv-00922PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER DECIDING PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIM OF DISPARATE IMPACT DISCRIMINATION
Richard P. Matsch, Senior Judge
The Second Amended Complaint, filed February 1, 2016, includes a claim that the use of a physical fitness test to determine *1073continuation of employment as Colorado Springs Police Officers has had a disparate impact on women officers over 40 years of age in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. That being an equitable claim to be determined by the Court, a motion to bifurcate it from the other claims was filed on…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Ricci v. DeStefanoSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Hazelwood School District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Smith v. City of JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Catherine Erdman v. City of MadisonCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2024
- Dale Hartley v. University of Holy CrossLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2023
- Dale Hartley v. University of Holy CrossLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2023
- Rosales v. Walmart, Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 2022