- Turner Padget Client Thwarts Inequitable Attempts of Minority Shareholder To Protect His Self-Dealing
- Favorable Settlement for Local Business Reached After Three Days of Trial in US District Court for the District of South Carolina
- Turner Padget Lawyer Helps Obtain Favorable Opinion for Defense Bar
- Protecting a Manufacturer Against a Potential Class Action
- Turner Padget Awarded Summary Judgment for Restaurant Chain
- Successfully represented a developer of a construction and demolition debris landfill in the South Carolina Administrative Law Court
- Turner Padget's Financial Services Industry Group received a defense verdict in a Three-Day Trial
- Plaintiff's Claim for Defamation was Eliminated at Trial on Our Motion for Directed Verdict
- Reaching a Favorable Settlement in a Multi-Party Construction Defects Case
Protecting a Manufacturer Against a Potential Class Action
Turner Padget represented the world’s largest producer of aerosol valves in a lawsuit that alleged racial harassment, race discrimination, and retaliation under various federal and state statutes in the Greenville Division of the United States District Court.
The Company formerly employed Plaintiff, who filed this case as a class action on behalf of all African-American current and former employees, alleging discrimination in promotions, pay, overtime, discipline, and termination. Potential liability could have exceeded $100 million if the class members won all claims and received significant punitive damages.
The Company successfully defeated the class action allegations during pre-trial discovery and then defended the remainder of the lawsuit against a single plaintiff. At the conclusion of pre-trial discovery, the Company moved for summary judgment on all claims, and the U.S. Magistrate recommended granting the motion. Plaintiff’s attorney objected, but the U.S. District Judge adopted the recommendation, after oral arguments, thereby dismissing the entire case at summary judgment.
Plaintiff appealed to the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and the appellate court unanimously affirmed summary judgment for the Company. This case has important precedential value because the Court expressly refused to adopt a District of Columbia Circuit Court ruling that would have lessened the requisite proof standard in most employment discrimination and retaliation cases.