Ricci v. DeStafano

530 F.3d 87, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 12261, 91 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 43,235, 103 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1044, 2008 WL 2345128
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedJune 9, 2008
DocketDocket 06-4996-cv
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 530 F.3d 87 (Ricci v. DeStafano) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ricci v. DeStafano, 530 F.3d 87, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 12261, 91 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 43,235, 103 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1044, 2008 WL 2345128 (2d Cir. 2008).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We withdraw our Summary Order of February 15, 2008. Ricci v. DeStefano, 264 Fed-Appx. 106 (2d Cir.2008).

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Arterton, J.) granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on all counts.

We affirm, for the reasons stated in the thorough, thoughtful, and well-reasoned opinion of the court below. Ricci v. DeStefano, 554 F.Supp.2d 142, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73277, 2006 WL 2828419 (D.Conn. Sept. 28, 2006). In this case, the Civil Service Board found itself in the unfortunate position of having no good alternatives. We are not unsympathetic to the plaintiffs’ expression of frustration. Mr. Ricci, for example, who is dyslexic, made intensive efforts that appear to have resulted in his scoring highly on one of the exams, only to have it invalidated. But it simply does not follow that he has a viable Title VII claim. To the contrary, because the Board, in refusing to validate the exams, was simply trying to fulfill its obligations under Title VII when confronted with test results that had a disproportionate racial impact, its actions were protected.

CONCLUSION

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Christa Mcauliffe Intermediate School Pto v. De Blasio
364 F. Supp. 3d 253 (S.D. Illinois, 2019)
Briscoe v. City of New Haven
967 F. Supp. 2d 563 (D. Connecticut, 2013)
Ficken v. Clinton
841 F. Supp. 2d 85 (District of Columbia, 2012)
Ricci v. DeStefano
557 U.S. 557 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Margerum v. City of Buffalo
63 A.D.3d 1574 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
United States v. New York City Board of Education
620 F. Supp. 2d 413 (E.D. New York, 2009)
Joe Oakley v. City of Memphis
315 F. App'x 500 (Sixth Circuit, 2008)
Ricci v. DeStefano
530 F.3d 88 (Second Circuit, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
530 F.3d 87, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 12261, 91 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 43,235, 103 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1044, 2008 WL 2345128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ricci-v-destafano-ca2-2008.