Miall et al v. City of Asheville 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

Miall et al v. City of Asheville et al

Overview

Plaintiffs, a group of white Asheville residents, argue that Defendants unlawfully use race and ethnicity as criteria when appointing people to the city's Human Relations Commission (HRC).

Details

Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the issue presented by Plaintiffs was moot. According to Defendants, city ordinances removed any minimum level of diversity among the HRC's membership.

On August 26, 2024, a US Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiffs' section 1981 claim be dismissed while the Equal Protection claim be allowed to proceed. Even though the ordinance did not impose quotas or require the appointment of individuals from minority groups, the Plaintiffs alleged that the ordinance—as actually applied and administered by the City—continued to place non-minority applicants on an unequal footing. As such, at this early stage of the litigation, the Magistrate Judge concluded that the matter should be allowed to proceed.

On October 29, 2024, the court accepted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to allow the Equal Protection claim to proceed, but rejected the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to dismiss the section 1981 claim. As such, the case is ongoing.

Court

U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina

Status

Filed September 05, 2023 | Ongoing

Relevant Law

Section 1983 Section 1981 Equal Protection Clause Title VI

Topic

Government programs Diversity targets