Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, State of Missouri et al | Advancing DEI Initiative

Home About Cases Methodology Resources In the Media

GLOSSARY

The definitions in our glossary are primarily sourced from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary and Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute. We have made slight modifications where needed for brevity and to better tailor the definitions to the specific needs of users of this website. For more detailed explanations of the terms, users are encouraged to review the definitions on these websites or conduct their own independent research.

A written request made after a trial court’s final ruling, asking another court to review the trial court's decisions. Appellate courts typically decide whether a legal mistake was made and whether the mistake changed the outcome of the case.

An out-of-court procedure for resolving disputes in which one or more people, “arbitrator(s),” hear evidence and make a decision. It's like a trial in some ways, but typically proceeds more quickly and with less formality.

A lawsuit in which a large number of people with similar legal claims join together (the class) to sue. In this context, it likely refers to cases in which a group of people claim they have suffered discrimination at the hands of an organization.

A document filed in court that starts a lawsuit. In some states and in some types of legal actions, the complaint is called a petition.

the money awarded to one party because of an injury or loss caused by another party.

The person or entity against whom a civil case is filed.

A court order requiring a person to do or stop doing a specific action.

Harm done to a person or organization by the acts or omissions of another. Injury may be physical or may involve damage to reputation, loss of a legal right, or breach of a contract.

An appeal that occurs before the trial court's final ruling on an entire case.

Any party to a lawsuit. This might include a plaintiff, defendant, petitioner, respondent, cross-complainant, or cross-defendant, but not a witness or attorney.

The process of bringing and pursuing (litigating) a lawsuit.

A formal request, either written or oral, that a judge enter a particular order or ruling in a lawsuit.

A motion asking the judge to throw out one or more claims or an entire lawsuit.

These phrases refer to a case whose decision rests upon the law as it applied to the particular evidence and facts presented. This is in opposition to cases whose decisions rest upon procedural grounds (e.g. not filing a timely complaint).

The person, corporation, or other legal entity that initiates a lawsuit seeking damages, enforcement of a contract, or a court determination of rights. In certain states and for some types of lawsuits, the term petitioner is used instead.

Any legal document filed in a lawsuit, including the complaint, answer, and motion(s). The pleading stage gives notice to both parties of the intention of the opposing party regarding the lawsuit.

An opinion of a federal or state court of appeals establishing a legal principle or rule that must be followed by lower courts when faced with similar legal issues.

A court order early in a lawsuit that prohibits the parties from taking a disputed action until the court can decide the merits of the case.

A document that public companies must provide their shareholders prior to a shareholder meeting. The document summarizes proposals submitted to shareholders for a vote.

Punishment of an employee by an employer for engaging in legally protected activity like making a complaint of harassment or participating in workplace investigations. It can include any negative job action, such as demotion, discipline, or firing.

A person's right to sue and have a court rule on their claims. To invoke a federal court's jurisdiction and have the court exercise its remedial powers on their behalf, a person must have standing.

A final decision by a judge, upon a party's motion, that resolves a lawsuit before there is a trial.

CASE NAME

Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, State of Missouri et al

Download Opinionarrow_circle_right

Overview

Petitioner alleged that her employer engaged in sex discrimination in violation of Title VII when it involuntarily transferred her to a different role.

Details

The district court granted summary judgment to Defendant, finding that Plaintiff did not suffer a significant alteration to her work responsibilities and experienced no change in salary or rank, and therefore could not demonstrate that she had suffered an “adverse employment action” necessary to make out a Title VII claim.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of Plaintiff’s claim, holding that the Appellant had not experienced an “adverse employment action” because the allegedly discriminatory transfer decision did not cause her a materially significant disadvantage.

The U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeals decision, finding that a Title VII claimant need only show that they suffered "some harm" with respect to an "identifiable term or condition of employment," and are not required to show that the harm is "significant," "substantial," or any similar adjective suggesting a heightened bar.

Court

U.S. Supreme Court

Status

Filed August 31, 2022 | Decided

Relevant Law

Topic

Workplace discrimination

Litigation History

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri

arrow_circle_right

Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals

arrow_circle_right

Significance

This decision lowered the bar for making out a successful Title VII discrimination claim, potentially making it easier to bring both an anti-DEI lawsuit and a traditional discrimination claim. The implications for DEI, however, are unclear, because they will depend on whether lower courts interpret the requirement for "some harm" to be closer to the pre-existing case law (which required significant or material harm) or closer to a no-harm requirement. For now, it appears that Muldrow does not materially affect the legality of DEI programs.