holding that Title VII’s personal-staff exception must be pleaded as an affirmative defense
How later courts described this case
- holding that Title VII’s personal-staff exception must be pleaded as an affirmative defense
- finding that the sheriff, not the county, was the deputy sheriffs employer because the sheriff made all appointment, removal, and compensation decisions regarding deputies, subject to the county’s budget approval
- holding that assessment of punitive damages in a Title VII claim against a sheriff constituted plain error and reversing the award even though the appellants failed to properly preserve their objection
- holding that § 1981 creates a cause of action against private actors, but “[§ ] 1983 remains the only provision to expressly create a remedy against persons acting under color of state law”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
POLITZ, Circuit Judge,
specially concurring:
I specially concur, but conclude that the more appropriate disposition of the 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (c) issue presented herein would be as that accorded by our colleagues in the Ninth Circuit in Federation of African American Contractors v. Oakland, 96 F.3dl204 (9th Cir.1996).