Novack Investment Company, Etc. v. Chester W. Setser

Background

A man who applied to be a truck driver sued a trucking company, saying the company refused to hire him because of his race. He sued under a federal law that bars racial discrimination in hiring and asked for money for lost wages and other damages. The trial court denied his request for a jury on all issues, but the Eighth Circuit reversed and held he was entitled to a jury on his legal claims, including backpay.

Reasoning

The central question was whether a jury or a judge should decide liability and the award of backpay in this kind of hiring-discrimination case. The Supreme Court declined to review the Eighth Circuit’s ruling. Justice Stevens, respecting the denial, said both the Eighth Circuit and the Sixth Circuit agreed liability should be decided by a jury and that the arithmetic calculation of backpay is less important; he also noted the employer no longer offered the job, making the backpay question unusual. Justice White, joined by Justices Brennan and Marshall, dissented and argued the Court should have granted review to resolve the conflict between circuits because the right to a jury trial is fundamental.

Real world impact

Because the Supreme Court denied review, the Eighth Circuit’s view remains the rule in that region: juries can decide liability and backpay in similar cases. But other circuits have taken a different view, so people suing for hiring discrimination may get different trial procedures depending on where they file. This denial does not finally resolve the national conflict and could change if the Court later takes a similar case.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White’s dissent emphasized the need for a uniform national rule on jury rights and would have granted review to settle the split among federal appeals courts.