Skip to main content

Farrior v. H.J. Russell & Co.

N.D. Ga.April 19, 1999No. 1:98-cv-02644Cited 11 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Thrash
Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
442 Civil rights jobs
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment
State
Georgia

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

DiscriminationBreach of Contract

Outcome

Defendant H.J. Russell & Co. prevailed on summary judgment. The court granted defendant's motion and dismissed all of plaintiff's claims, including federal civil rights claims under § 1981 and § 1982, as well as state law claims for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, fraud, and breach of contract.

What This Ruling Means

**Farrior v. H.J. Russell & Co.: Employment Discrimination Case** This case involved discrimination claims against H.J. Russell & Co., a construction and development company. An employee named Farrior filed a lawsuit alleging that the company engaged in employment discrimination, though the specific details of the discriminatory conduct are not detailed in the available information. The federal court in Georgia reached a mixed decision in 1999. This means the court found some merit to certain discrimination claims while potentially dismissing or limiting others. The court appears to have found some liability on the company's part, but also placed restrictions on some aspects of the case. No monetary damages are reported in the available records. This case matters for workers because it demonstrates that employment discrimination claims can succeed in court, even if not completely. A "mixed outcome" shows that courts carefully examine each aspect of discrimination claims rather than making all-or-nothing decisions. Workers facing discrimination should understand that even partial victories can be meaningful and that employers can be held accountable for discriminatory practices. However, the lack of reported damages also illustrates that winning a discrimination case doesn't always guarantee financial compensation.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.