Race Discrimination Rejected in Appeals Court

  • Over 100 Years of Experience

    Our dedicated attorneys have a reputation for success.

    Meet Our Team
  • Our Awards Set Us Apart

    Learn about our distinguishing awards & how this benefits you.

    What It Means For You
  • Client Testimonials

    Many satisfied clients have used Schwartz Perry & Heller.

    What They Have to Say
  • Request Your Consultation

    Contact our firm today to learn how we can help you.

    Get Started Now

Race Discrimination Rejected in Appeals Court

John Hithon, an African-American male, and former employee of a food plant, brought suit against his former employer alleging race discrimination. Hithon, who possessed 13 years of experience on the job, was passed over for a shift supervisor position by his manager, who was white, in favor of two white candidates from other plants.

Evidence admitted at trial consisted of statements made by the manager routinely calling black employees "boy." The first jury found in Hithon's favor, awarding him $1 million. The decision was later reversed by the 11th circuit. The Court reasoned that: "The use of 'boy' when modified by a racial classification like 'black' or 'white' is evidence of discriminatory intent . . ., the use of 'boy' alone is not evidence of discrimination."

The case then went to the United States Supreme Court which reversed and remanded for trial, stating that the inquiry should involve the context in which the statement was made. A new, second jury returned a verdict in Hithon's favor, but the Appellate Court, once again, reversed.

Contact Us

Schwartz Perry & Heller LLP
New York Employment Law Attorney
Located at: 3 Park Ave.,
27th Floor,

New York, NY 10016
View Map
Phone: (646) 490-0221
Local Phone: (212) 889-6565
© 2018 All Rights Reserved.


The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.