Case: Biondo v. City of Chicago (Chicago Firefighters vs. City of Chicago)

1:88-cv-03773 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Filed Date: April 29, 1988

Closed Date: Oct. 9, 2009

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On April 29th, 1988 a group of white firefighters filed suit against Chicago in the District Court for the Eastern District of Illinois alleging that the Chicago Fire Department (CFD) had discriminated against them by denying or delaying promotions. The group was certified as a class in May 1990. The complaint stemmed from the CFD's 1986 test for promotion. The test had been developed to be non-discriminatory but had disparate impact and thus the CFD elected to use segregated lists for promo…

On April 29th, 1988 a group of white firefighters filed suit against Chicago in the District Court for the Eastern District of Illinois alleging that the Chicago Fire Department (CFD) had discriminated against them by denying or delaying promotions. The group was certified as a class in May 1990. The complaint stemmed from the CFD's 1986 test for promotion. The test had been developed to be non-discriminatory but had disparate impact and thus the CFD elected to use segregated lists for promotion.

The district court (Judge James F. Holderman) separated the liability and damages phase of the case. On October 4th, 2000 a jury determined that the CFD had discriminated against the class. Class members who would not have been promoted were dismissed from the case on September 7th, 2001. On February 28th and May 17th, 2002 two jury trials concerning class members whose promotions were delayed or denied resulted in monetary damages for 19 class members totaling roughly $5.1 million. Chicago appealed to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and on August 27th, 2004 the court (Judge Easterbrook, Judge Manion, and Judge Williams) vacated the awards holding that they were excessive. Plaintiffs were denied en banc review on September 21st, 2004 and their petition for writ of certiorari was denied by the Supreme Court on February 28th, 2005.

A trial concerning injunctive relief resulted in the promotion of a number of these plaintiffs on December 16th, 2005. Settlement negotiations ensued regarding all damages, resulting in final judgments awarding various promotions and reduced monetary damages of roughly $2 million to these plaintiffs in December 2006 and January 2007. The remaining plaintiffs, those whose promotions would have been denied had the CFD not ceased using the lists early, and Chicago engaged in settlement negotiations and on February 20th, 2009 the district court approved a damage allocation process distributing $6 million. Final judgment was entered on October 9th, 2009.

Summary Authors

Michael Perry (6/30/2010)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5207283/parties/chgo-fire-fighters-v-chgo/


Judge(s)

Easterbrook, Frank Hoover (Illinois)

Holderman, James F. (Illinois)

Manion, Daniel Anthony (Indiana)

Williams, Ann Claire (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bish, Suzanne Elaine (Illinois)

Murray, James (Illinois)

Weinstein, Jill (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Abrahams, Nadine C. (Illinois)

Avendano, Naomi Ann (Illinois)

Burke, Edward J. (Illinois)

Judge(s)

Easterbrook, Frank Hoover (Illinois)

Holderman, James F. (Illinois)

Manion, Daniel Anthony (Indiana)

Williams, Ann Claire (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bish, Suzanne Elaine (Illinois)

Murray, James (Illinois)

Weinstein, Jill (Illinois)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Abrahams, Nadine C. (Illinois)

Avendano, Naomi Ann (Illinois)

Burke, Edward J. (Illinois)

Cohen, Diane S. (Illinois)

Gagliardo, Joseph (Illinois)

Hall, Robert Raymond (Illinois)

Johlie, Christopher (Illinois)

Kertez, Jay Michael (Illinois)

Libby, Eileen (Illinois)

Naber, Jennifer (Illinois)

Pinelli, Vincent Dominick (Illinois)

Rocks, Patrick J. Jr. (Illinois)

Scott, Curtrice (Illinois)

Seery, David (Illinois)

Soloman, Benna Ruth (Illinois)

Vanderwicken, Sarah (Illinois)

Ward, Torrick (Illinois)

Other Attorney(s)

Bredemann, Ronald (Illinois)

Fischer, Max (Illinois)

Friedman, Linda (Illinois)

Gilbert, Jennifer Schoen (Illinois)

Hilliard, Terrance (Illinois)

Leinenweber, Thomas More (Illinois)

Pedersen, Erika E. (Illinois)

Russell, Richard (Illinois)

Stowell, Mary (Illinois)

Wood, James Bryan (Illinois)

Zelizer, Ethan G. (Illinois)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

General Docket

Biondo v. City of Chicago

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Feb. 28, 2005 Docket

Docket

Biondo v. Chicago

March 31, 2010 Docket
454

(Denying motion to dismiss as to some plaintiffs and granting as to others)

Biondo v. City of Chicago

Sept. 7, 2001 Order/Opinion

Memorandum Order and Opinion Directing Entry of Judgments

Biondo v. City of Chicago

2002 WL 335317, 2002 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 3463

March 1, 2002 Order/Opinion
707

MEMORANDUM OPINION EXPLAINING THE EXCLUSION OF THE TESTIMONY OF THE CITY'S PROFFERED EXPERT WITNESS DANIEL GARCIA DURING DAMAGES TRIALS NOS. 1 and 2

Biondo v. Chicago

2002 WL 1160948, 2002 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 9816

May 30, 2002 Order/Opinion
708

MEMORANDUM OPINION DIRECTING ENTRY OF JUDGMENTS

Biondo v. City of Chicago

2002 WL 1160930

May 30, 2002 Order/Opinion

Opinion (Vacating Damages Award)

Biondo v. Chicago

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

382 F.3d 608, 2004 U.S.App.LEXIS 18245

Aug. 27, 2004 Order/Opinion
1303

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING CITY OF CHICAGO’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Biondi v. City of Chicago

2007 WL 2126088

July 23, 2007 Order/Opinion
1360

ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF THE GROUP B PLAINTIFFS-INTERVENORS DAMAGE ALLOCATION PROCESS

Biondi v. City of Chicago

Feb. 20, 2009 Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5207283/chgo-fire-fighters-v-chgo/

Last updated May 11, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
565

MINUTE ORDER of 2/28/02 by Hon. James F. Holderman : Trial held-bench. Trial ends for the first ten plaintiffs. Trial on the second set of ten plaintiffs is set for 04/29/02 at 9:00a.m. The parties are to submit the joint final pretrial order on the next ten plaitiffs with all motions in limine and supporting memoranda by 04/04/02. Responses are to be filed by 04/11/02. Trial on the third set of ten plaintiffs is set for 06/17/02 at 9:00a.m. Pretrial conference is set for 06/06/02 at 4:30p.m. Th e parties are to submit the joint final pretrial order on the next the plaintiffs with all motions in limine and supporting memoranda by 05/23/02. Responses are to be filed by 05/30/02. Entered Memorandum Opinion Directing Entry of Judgments. No notice (lc)

Feb. 28, 2002 RECAP
707

MINUTE ORDER of 5/30/02 by Hon. James F. Holderman : Entered Memorandum Opinion re: exclusion of testimony of defendant proffered expert Daniel Garcia during damage trials 1 and 2 . Maile notice by judge's staff (lc)

May 30, 2002 RECAP
708

MINUTE ORDER of 5/30/02 by Hon. James F. Holderman : Entered Memorandum Opinion directing entry of judgments. Mailed notice by judge's staff (lc)

May 30, 2002 RECAP
1303

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING CITY OF CHICAGO'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge James F. Holderman on 7/23/2007: Mailed notice (am)

July 23, 2007 RECAP

State / Territory: Illinois

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

Private Employment Class Actions

Key Dates

Filing Date: April 29, 1988

Closing Date: Oct. 9, 2009

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

White firefighters whose promotions were delayed or denied.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

City of Chicago (Chicago, Cook), City

Defendant Type(s):

Fire

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

Constitutional Clause(s):

Equal Protection

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Litigation

Form of Settlement:

Private Settlement Agreement

Amount Defendant Pays: Roughly $8,000,000

Content of Injunction:

Promotion

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination-area:

Promotion

Discrimination-basis:

Race discrimination

Race:

White