Foot Locker

Lloyd Brown alleged Foot Locker steered Black managers into “ethnic” stores and blocked him from “non-ethnic” stores. A jury found intentional race discrimination under Title VII. The Fifth Circuit in Brown v. Kinney Shoe Corp. upheld liability on the failure-to-promote claim while remanding damages.

• Jury finding (Title VII)
  Jury found intentional race discrimination in promotionsIn Brown v. Kinney Shoe Corp., 237 F.3d 556 (5th Cir. 2001), Lloyd Brown, who is Black, alleged Foot Locker failed to promote him to manage “non-ethnic” stores while offering “ethnic” stores. A jury found Foot Locker liable for intentional racial discrimination under Title VII and awarded back pay, mental-anguish, and punitive damages (later subject to statutory caps and remand).Source: Justia (5th Cir.) ↗
• Liability upheld; damages remanded
  Fifth Circuit upheld failure-to-promote liabilityThe Fifth Circuit held the evidence was sufficient to support Brown’s failure-to-promote claim and rejected Foot Locker’s sufficiency challenge on that claim, while finding constructive-discharge evidence insufficient and remanding for a new trial on damages. Liability for intentional discrimination in promotion stands as affirmed in that respect.Source: Justia (5th Cir.) ↗