Gardner v. Westinghouse Broadcasting Co.

Background

A woman who applied for a radio talk-show host job sued the station owner, alleging sex discrimination and seeking to represent a class of past, present, and future female employees, rejected applicants, and women deterred from applying. She asked for classwide equitable relief and moved for class certification under Rule 23. The District Court denied certification for lack of typicality and common questions, and she immediately appealed, arguing the denial effectively refused a large part of the requested injunction under 28 U.S.C. §1292(a)(1). The Courts of Appeals were split on that issue, and the Supreme Court agreed to decide the question.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether denying class certification counts as an interlocutory order “refusing an injunction” under §1292(a)(1). It held that the statute’s appeal exception is narrow and aimed at orders that directly and irreparably dispose of injunctive relief. The denial in this case did not decide the legal sufficiency of any injunction claim, did not resolve the petitioner’s individual claim on the merits, and could be reviewed before or after final judgment. The Court contrasted this situation with earlier cases—such as General Electric—where an injunction claim was entirely disposed of and therefore immediately appealable, and it warned against opening the statute to many pretrial orders.

Real world impact

The decision means plaintiffs denied class status generally cannot treat that denial as an immediate appealable refusal of an injunction; they normally must wait for final judgment to obtain appellate review. That outcome preserves the policy against piecemeal appeals and will affect how plaintiffs and lawyers plan class-action strategy and the timing of appeals.