Bennett v. Nucor Corp., 656 F.3d 802

Background

Six African-American employees alleged race discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII at the Blytheville, Arkansas Nucor plant.
Plaintiffs sought class certification for all black employees at the Blytheville plant since 1999.
District court denied class certification, granted summary judgment on several claims, and the case proceeded to trial on hostile environment claims and a retaliation claim by Lee.
Jury awarded plaintiffs $100,000 in compensatory and $100,000 in punitive damages on hostile environment claims; Li e’s retaliation claim was denied.
Nucor moved for interlocutory relief; thirteen individuals later sought to intervene post-judgment, which the district court denied for lack of jurisdiction.
On appeal, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s rulings, including the denial of class certification and the punitive damages ruling, and rejected challenges to evidentiary rulings.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
admissibility of nonparty discrimination evidence	Bennett argues district court erred by admitting nonparty discrimination evidence.	Nucor contends admission relied on a per se rule for nonparty evidence and was prejudicial.	Evidentiary rulings were not abuse; trial court engaged case-by-case analysis and Rule 403 balancing.
class certification commonality	Plaintiffs claim commonality exists due to shared discriminatory policies.	Nucor asserts department-level variation defeats commonality.	District court did not abuse its discretion; substantial interdepartmental variation precludes class-wide resolution.
disparate impact claims under Title VII and §1981	Statistical and anecdotal evidence show plant-wide disparate impact in promotions.	Evidence does not isolate a single practice causing disparate impact and promotions varied by department.	Summary judgment upheld; §1981 disparate impact failed; Title VII disparate impact failed due to non-separable practices and flawed statistics.
failure-to-train and failure-to-promote claims	Black employees were denied training and promotional opportunities available to white employees.	Evidence shows no comparably situated employees and no identical decision-makers supporting discrimination.	Summary judgment affirmed for lack of evidence showing discriminatory treatment or minimally qualified comparators.
punitive damages review	Punitive damages supported by evidence of knowledge and motives.	District court erred in awarding punitive damages without proper standard.	No review of punitive damages awarded because defendant failed to renew Rule 50(b) motion; judgment stands as is.

Key Cases Cited

Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn, 552 U.S. 379 (U.S. 2008) (no per se rule for disallowed evidence; context-specific inquiry under Rule 401/403)
Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust, 487 U.S. 977 (U.S. 1988) (subjective vs objective criteria in disparate impact not class-certification issue)
Falcon v. General Tel. Co. of Sw., 457 U.S. 147 (U.S. 1982) (commonality requires a common contention capable of classwide resolution)
Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 131 S. Ct. 2541 (U.S. 2011) (rigorous analysis for class certification; commonality must drive resolution)
Morgan v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 380 F.3d 459 (8th Cir. 2004) (applicant pool qualifications; // qualification standards for statistics)
Williams v. ConAgra Poultry Co., 378 F.3d 790 (8th Cir. 2004) (evidence of harassment against nonparties admissible to show environment and motives)
Sandoval v. Am. Bldg. Maint. Indus., Inc., 578 F.3d 787 (8th Cir. 2009) (nonparty harassment evidence relevant to hostile environment claims)
Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (U.S. 1998) (liability for supervisor-created hostile environment; notice standards)
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (U.S. 1998) (employer liability for harassment by supervisory employees; preventative duties)
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (8th Cir. 2010) (case-specific relevance of prior acts in admissibility analysis)