Rios v. Enterprise Ass'n Steamfitters, Local No. 638

How later courts describe this case

• not an abuse of discretion for lower court to deduct public assistance payments from Title VII
• Rule 706 expert appointed after class action settlement to evaluate adequacy of a document filing system
• defendant's claim that he was "high" due to an intravenous injection of heroin and preludin two and one-half hours before confessing rejected in view of police testimony that he was coherent
• “It is the date of actual remedying of discrimination, rather than the date of the district court’s order, which should govern.”
• although weight of common law authority would support refusal to deduct “public assistance” from Title VII back-pay award, district court’s offset of unemployment compensation held “[a]s a matter of policy” not to be abuse of discretion
• factor of federal funding can be considered in computation of award
• ex parte contacts between judges and their appointed experts should be avoided
• oral warnings not required, written warnings are sufficient