# Celio DIAZ, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PAN AMERICAN WORLD AIRWAYS, INC., Defendant-Appellee

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · May 10, 1971 · 442 F.2d 385

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9456870

## Case

- **Full name:** 3 Fair empl.prac.cas. 337, 3 Fair empl.prac.cas. 469, 3 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 8166 Celio Diaz, Jr. v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** May 10, 1971
- **Citations:** 442 F.2d 385
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Tuttle, Ainsworth, Simpson
- **Cited by:** 223 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9456870

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- rejecting the contention that sex was a BFOQ for airline flight attendants because the airline's proposed justification - to provide a “pleasing environment” for passengers - was merely tangential to the airline's primary objective of providing safe transportation
- holding that customer preference for female flight attendants does not constitute a "bona fide occupational qualification" under Title VII
- finding airline could not refuse to hire male flight attendants simply because male customers preferred the employment of female flight attendants
- rejecting an airline’s contention that “the special psychological needs of its passengers ... are better attended to by females”

## Opinion text

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING AND PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
PER CURIAM:
The Petition for Rehearing is denied and no member of this panel nor Judge in regular active service on the Court having requested that the Court be polled on rehearing en banc, (Rule 35 Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure; Local Fifth Circuit Rule 12) the Petition for Rehearing En Banc is denied.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9456870. Public record. Not legal advice.