Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Slater

<bold>Public Officers and Employees — race discrimination claim — §</bold> <bold>1983 — Title VII</bold> <block_quote> The trial court erred by granting defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff county DSS employee's race discrimination claims even though the complaint appears to attempt to assert a claim directly under the federal constitution instead of referencing <cross_reference>42 U.S.C. § 1983</cross_reference>, because: (1) the mere fact that a complaint neglects to specify that it is based on § 1983 does not require dismissal even though referencing the statute is the more preferable course; (2) the allegations in the complaint were sufficient to support a § 1983 claim for violation of plaintiff's equal protection rights against both defendant DSS director individually and defendant DSS employer; and (3) a state or local government employee may pursue claims of race discrimination under Title VII, § 1983, or both.</block_quote>

Arbitration agreement race discrimination retaliation motion to stay litigation pending arbitration procedurally unconscionable. - Trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting employer's motion to stay litigation pending arbitration of plaintiff's race discrimination and retaliation claims where plaintiff failed to demonstrate that his claims were not subject to arbitration and that the agreement was procedurally unconscionable.