National Association of Government Employees v. City Public Service Board of San Antonio - United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

National Association of Government Employees v. City Public Service Board of San Antonio

By United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

  • Release Date: 1994-12-06
  • Genre: Law

Description

Plaintiffs-appellants Eustacio B. Diaz (Diaz), Guillermo R. Gaona (Gaona), and the National Association of Government Employees (collectively Plaintiffs) brought this putative class action against defendant-appellee the City of San Antonio, Texas, acting by and through the City Public Service Board (CPS). In 1977, Plaintiffs filed charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), alleging that CPS discriminated against its Mexican-American and Mexican alien workers on the basis of their national origin in hiring, promotion, discipline, and other terms and conditions of employment. After efforts at conciliation failed in 1980, the EEOC referred the case to the Department of Justice and informed Plaintiffs that the Department of Justice would either notify them of its intention to prosecute the case or issue a right to sue letter. Nothing more happened until late 1989, when Plaintiffs determined that the Department of Justice had no record of their case, obtained a right to sue letter, and filed this suit in the district court below. Plaintiffs alleged violations of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983, and the Texas constitution. CPS moved to dismiss the Title VII claim on the basis of laches and to dismiss the section 1981 claim either on summary judgment or for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. The magistrate Judge to whom the case had been referred recommended that both these motions be granted and in addition recommended denial of class certification and dismissal with prejudice of Plaintiffs Title VII claims and dismissal without prejudice of their section 1981, section 1983, and state law claims. The district court adopted the recommendation of the magistrate Judge, and Plaintiffs appeal that judgment. We find no error and therefore affirm.

Comments