Case: Hyman v. First Union Corp.

On May 12, 1994, terminated employees of First Union Corporation filed a lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e and 29 U.S.C. § 626 against First Union Corporation ("First Union") in the United States District Court, District of Columbia. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, asked the Court for injunctive relief and damages, claiming that First Union's policies, although neutral on their face, resulted in the termination of a disproportionate number of individuals over forty years of age, black and of foreign origin, in the course of First Union's acquisition of three banking institutions in Virginia, Maryland, and Washington, D.C. Plaintiffs further contended that First Union promised displaced employees "priority consideration" for other positions but later disregarded that promise. Finally, Plaintiffs allege that employees selected to replace those laid off were almost entirely under the age of forty and white.

The Court issued a Findings of Fact and Order granting final approval of a settlement agreement on March 1, 1996.

On August 12, 1997, the Court (Judge Royce C. Lamberth) approved the collective actions proposed by Plaintiffs to pursue their ADEA claims. Hyman v. First Union Corp., 982 F. Supp. 1 (D. D.C. 1997).

The Court allowed Plaintiffs to file a seventh amended complaint on August 12, 1997. Hyman v. First Union Corp., No. 94-1043, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18009 (D. D.C. Aug. 12, 1997).

On August 27, 1997, the Court granted partial summary judgment for Defendant on Plaintiffs' state law breach of contract claims and denied as moot Plaintiffs' motion to maintain the contract claims as a class action. Hyman v. First Union Corp., 982 F. Supp. 8 (D. D.C. 1997).

On September 2, 1997, the Court granted partial summary judgment for Defendant on Plaintiffs' Reston Servicenter ethnic discrimination claims and granted Plaintiffs' motion to maintain a consolidated action for all black branch managers and assistant black managers alleging employment discrimination. Hyman v. First Union Corp., 982 F. Supp. 14 (D. D.C. 1997).

On September 26, 1997, the Court granted Defendant's motion to dismiss on the grounds that claims of discrimination based on disparate impact were not cognizable under the ADEA. Hyman v. First Union Corp., 980 F. Supp. 38 (D. D.C. 1997).

On October 9, 1997, the Court denied Defendant's motion for summary judgment on the ADEA and DCHRA claims of several individual plaintiffs; it granted Defendant's motion for summary judgment on the Section 1981 claim of one individual plaintiff. Hyman v. First Union Corp., 980 F. Supp. 46 (D. D.C. 1997).

The Court denied the EEOC's motion to intervene and to compel First Union to disclose document sealed under a Protective Order and Joint Stipulation on June 21, 2001.

The Court denied another motion by the EEOC to intervene and set aside the protective order previously entered into in the case on June 10, 2005.

There has been no further action in the case.