• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT----------------------------------------------------------xMICHAEL BRISCOE:Plaintiff::NO: 3:09-CV-01642 (CSH)v.::CITY OF NEW HAVEN :Defendant:NOVEMBER 2, 2009----------------------------------------------------------xMEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTIONFOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGSThe defendant, the City of New Haven, submits this memorandum of law insupport of its Motion for Stay of Proceedings. In determining whether to grant a stay,district courts within the Second Circuit typically analyze the interests of the plaintiff, thedefendant, the court, non-parties and thepublic. When the interestsof each areconsidered in light of the procedural posture and facts ofthis case, it is clear that a stayshould be entered. Proceeding at this time will not benefit the plaintiff in any way.However, it will waste judicial resources and possibly result in inconsistent andconflicting rulings,thus causing a detriment to the defendant, this Court, nonparties andthe public.I.INTRODUCTIONThe results of the promotionalexaminations at issuewere the subject of five daysof intense hearings and yet, although any and everyonewho wanted to testify had the
Case 3:09-cv-01642-CSH Document 12-2 Filed 11/02/2009 Page 1 of 14
 
2
opportunity to do so, the plaintiffsat silent. After otherfirefighters filed suitto force theCity to make the promotions, the plaintiffdid not say anything, much less seektointervene to protect his rights. While the case of these other firefighters ran its coursethrough this District Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit andthe Supreme Courtof the United States, he still said nothing. Now, on the eve of theother case arriving back to the District Court to resolve who should be promoted,Mr.Briscoe comes forth and asks a different judge in this Court to promote him and himalone and to do so on an expedited basis.The City asks this Courtinstead to require Briscoe to continue doing what he hasbeen doing for the last five and a half years: wait until the underlying Ricci v. DeStefanolitigation is resolved. Having waited until the eleventh hour to file his claim, he certainlycan wait “one hour” more.II.FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUNDAlthough Briscoe filed this case only weeks ago, at bottom, this case is reallyabout another casepending before Judge Janet Bond Arteron:Ricci, et al. v. City of NewHaven, et al., Docket No. 3:04-CV-1109 (JBA). In 2003, the City of New Haven’s firedepartment administered two promotional exams to determine eligibility for appointmentto the positions of Captain and Lieutenant. Due to a fear that certification of theeligibility lists would violate the disparate impact provision of Title VII of the Civil
Case 3:09-cv-01642-CSH Document 12-2 Filed 11/02/2009 Page 2 of 14
 
3
Rights Act of 1964, the Civil Service Board voted to not certify the eligibility lists. Inresponse, twenty White firefighters filed suitto force the City to certify the eligibilitylists and make promotions in accordance therewith. The City prevailed at the summary judgment stage in the District Court and this decision was upheld by the Second Circuit.In a sharply divided 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States ruledotherwise.The Supreme Court held that the proper standard for evaluating whether the Cityimproperly failed to certify the 2003 civil service examinations was its newly created“strong basis in evidence”standard. Ricci v. DeStefano, ---U.S. ---, 129 S.Ct. 2658,2676(2009)(“[W]e adopt the strong-basis-in-evidence standard as a matter of statutoryconstruction to resolve any conflict between the disparate-treatment and disparate-impactprovisions of Title VII.”). Under this standard, the Court held that the City failed toprovide a strong basis in evidence that a disparate impact violation would have occurredbecause it did not present sufficient facts that either the test was not job-related or thatthere was a viable less discriminatory alternative than the exam process alreadyadministered.Id.at 2681. The Riccicase has now been remanded to the District Courtfor further proceedings.On October 15, 2009, Michael Briscoe, filed the present action alleging that the2003 Lieutenant examination “had a disparate impact on African-American candidates;
Case 3:09-cv-01642-CSH Document 12-2 Filed 11/02/2009 Page 3 of 14
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...