Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Gloria Kendall Leblanc and Helen Jenkins Roig v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company, State of Louisiana

460 F.2d 1228

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1972-05-25
Topic
general

How later courts describe this case

  • Title VII intended to save state antidiscrimination laws, but not protective legislation

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Gloria Kendall Leblanc and Helen Jenkins Roig v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company, State of Louisiana. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status
pending
Cited by
50 opinions
LeBLANC v. SOUTHERN BELL TELE. TELEGRAPH,460 F.2d 1228(5th Cir. 1972)
GLORIA KENDALL LeBLANC AND HELEN JENKINS ROIG, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS-CROSS
APPELLEES, v. SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE TELEGRAPH COMPANY,
DEFENDANT-APPELLEE, STATE OF LOUISIANA, DEFENDANT-INTERVENOR-CROSS
APPELLANT.
No. 71-3402.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
May 25, 1972.
Leonard A. Washofsky, Jackson Hess, New Orleans, La., for plaintiffs-appellants-cross appellees.

Michael J. Molony, Jr., Robert K. McCalla, Jones, Walker, Waechter, Poitevent, Carrere Denegre, New Orleans, La., for defendant-appellee.

William P. Curry, Jr., Sp. Counsel, John E. Jackson, Jr., New Orleans, La., Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen., State of La., Baton Rouge, La., John M. Currier, Asst. Atty. Gen., New Orleans, La., for defendant-intervenor cross appellant.

Samuel H. Collins, New Orleans, La., for Communications Assn. for Equal Opportunity, Inc., amicus curiae.

Sylvia Roberts, Baton Rouge, La., Elizabeth Boyer, Novelly, Ohio, for NationalPage 1229Organization for Women and Women's Equity Action League, amicus curiae.

Kenneth M. Davidson, Buffalo, N.Y., Robert Ellis Palmer, Amite, La., for National Organization for Women, amicus curiae.

Philip Sklover, Vincent A. Fuller, Jr., Attys., John de J. Pemberton, Jr., Acting Gen. Counsel, Julia P. Cooper, Chief, Appellate Div., Charles L. Reischel, Atty., Equal Employment Opportunity Comm., Washington, D.C., Charles White, Dist. Counsel, New Orleans, La., for E.E.O.C., amicus curiae.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and RIVES and CLARK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
[1] In this Title VII1suit the District Court granted a judgment declaring invalid certain Louisiana protective statutes2limiting the hours women may work. The lone tag end of this litigation involves the contention that the District Court erred in not granting back pay to the otherwise successful plaintiffs from the date of their EEOC charges. Congress granted broad discretion to the District Court to fashion remedies in Title VII cases as the equities of the particular case compel.3The plaintiffs have not sustained their burden of showing that the District Court abused this discretion in declining to allow back pay for the reasons set forth in its opinion. LeBlanc v. Southern Bell Telephone Telegraph Co., E.D.La., 1971,333 F. Supp. 602,610-611.

[2] Affirmed.Page 1231
  1. Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C.A. § 2000eet seq. ↩
  2. La.Rev.Stat. §§23:311, 314, 332, 337. ↩
  3. The remedial provisions of Title VII provide that
    "If the court finds that the respondent has intentionally engaged in * * * an unlawful employment practice charged in the complaint, the court may enjoin the respondent from engaging in such unlawful employment practice, and order such affirmative action as may be appropriate, which may include reinstatement or hiring of employees, with or without back pay, * * * [or any other equitable relief as the court deems appropriate]."
    42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-5(g). ↩