By Dan Levine
SAN FRANCISCO, Sept 21 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge rejected
Wal-Mart Stores Inc's request to dismiss a gender discrimination
case filed in California, but said he would rule later about
whether the women plaintiffs had enough evidence to be certified
as a class.
The ruling on Friday came from U.S. District Judge Charles
Breyer in San Francisco federal court.
Plaintiffs alleging the world's largest retailer denied them
pay raises and promotions because of their gender are regrouping
after the U.S. Supreme Court last year dismantled a class of up
to 1.5 million current and former Walmart workers.
The Walmart workers filed a reformulated lawsuit, saying
they were confining their allegations to California. The new
case could include several hundred thousand potential class
members.
Walmart argued in part that the long history of the case,
with over 10 years of litigation, warranted dismissal of the
reformulated lawsuit.
But in his order on Friday, Breyer said he was not prepared
to deny the plaintiffs an opportunity to present evidence.
Walmart attorney Theodore Boutrous Jr. said the company has
a strong policy against discrimination, and that the claims are
unsuitable for a class action.
"The purported statewide class the plaintiffs allege is no
more appropriate today than the nationwide class the Supreme
Court has already rejected," Boutrous said.
But Brad Seligman, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said the
ruling vindicates a legal strategy of filing the reformulated
lawsuit in the wake of the Supreme Court's opinion. A similar
lawsuit was also filed against Walmart in Texas, and Seligman
said there will soon be others.
"The Supreme Court's opinion rejected a case, it didn't
reject every case," Seligman said.
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of
California is Betty Dukes, Patricia Surgeson, Edith Arana,
Deborah Gunter and Christine Kwapnoski, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc,
01-2252.
Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook