Susan A. Alizadeh, & Her Husband, Hassan H. Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., & Local 455, United Food & Com. Workers, Afl-Cio, 802 F.2d 111 (5th Cir. 1986). · Go Syfert
Search
Susan A. Alizadeh, & Her Husband, Hassan H. Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., & Local 455, United Food & Com. Workers, Afl-Cio, 802 F.2d 111 (5th Cir. 1986). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“1981 provides a cause of action to a white spouse who alleges that he was discriminated against in employment because of his marriage to a nonwhite.”
72 citation events (28 in the last 25 years) across 28 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: John B. Johnson v. University of Cincinnati, Joseph A. Steger, and Donald C. Harrison (ca6, 2000-06-01)
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986 2006 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 49 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) John B. Johnson v. University of Cincinnati, Joseph A. Steger, and Donald C. Harrison (2×) also: Cited "see"
6th Cir. · 2000 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
1981 provides a cause of action to a white spouse who alleges that he was discriminated against in employment because of his marriage to a nonwhite.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Delores S. Harris v. Gina Lagarde, et al.
M.D. La. · 2026 · confidence medium
Evans v. City of Houston, 246 F.3d 344 , 356 n. 9 (5th Cir. 2001) (citing Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir. 1986)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Autry v. Ahern Rentals, Inc. dba Ahern Rentals and Sales
W.D. Tex. · 2021 · confidence medium
Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir. 1986)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Thomas v. Owens
5th Cir. · 2009 · confidence medium
See Berry v. Brady, 192 F.3d 504, 507 (5th Cir.1999); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Bailey v. Cantrell
5th Cir. · 2008 · confidence medium
See Michaels v. Avitech, Inc., 202 F.3d 746 , 754–55 (5th Cir. 2000); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir. 1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Barnes v. McCree
5th Cir. · 2008 · confidence medium
See Michaels v. Avitech, Inc., 202 F.3d 746, 754-55 (5th Cir.2000); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Welzel v. Bernstein
D.D.C. · 2006 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Jackson v. Motel 6 Multipurpose, Inc., 130 F.3d 999, 1007 (11th Cir.1997) (indicating that plaintiffs' § 1981 retaliation claim may proceed based on plaintiffs’ allegations that they were fired for refusing to participate in employer's discrimination against non-white customers); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986) (allowing § 1981 suit by white female alleging she was discharged because her husband was Iranian), Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ahmmad Pourghoraishi v. Flying J, Incorporated, Steve Lindgren, Larry Williams, City of Gary, Indiana, Nakon Security, Incorporated (2×)
7th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
Pourghoraishi correctly explained that, in this messy business of classifying persons by race, anthropologists do indeed classify Iranians into the perhaps antiquated category of “Caucasians.” Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir.1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Pourghoraishi, Ahmma v. Flying J Inc (2×)
7th Cir. · 2006 · confidence medium
Pourghoraishi correctly explained that, in this messy business of classifying persons by race, anthropologists do indeed classify Iranians into the perhaps antiquated category of “Caucasians.” Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir. 1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Kalantar v. Lufthansa German Airlines
D.D.C. · 2005 · confidence medium
Aliza-deh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986); see also Daemi v. Church’s Fried Chicken, Inc., 931 F.2d 1379, 1387 (10th Cir.1991). 7 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Frank Bilello v. Kum & Go
8th Cir. · 2004 · confidence medium
Dist., 875 F.2d 676, 678-80 (8th Cir. 1989) (concluding white employee had standing under section 1981 to raise issue of racial discrimination directed against minority co-worker); Phelps v. Wichita Eagle-Beacon, 886 F.2d 1262, 1266-67 (10th Cir. 1989) (concluding white attorney had standing under section 1981 to sue newspaper publishing allegedly false articles because attorney represented minority clients); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir. 1986) (permitting section 1981 suit by white plaintiff terminated because of marriage to minority spouse); Parr v. Woodmen…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Frank Bilello v. Kum & Go, LLC Krause Gentle Corporation
8th Cir. · 2004 · confidence medium
Dist., 875 F.2d 676, 678-80 (8th Cir.1989) (concluding white employee had standing under section 1981 to raise issue of racial discrimination directed against minority co-worker); Phelps v. Wichita Eagle-Beacon, 886 F.2d 1262, 1266-67 (10th Cir.1989) (concluding white attorney had standing under section 1981 to sue newspaper publishing allegedly false articles because attorney represented minority clients); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir.1986) (permitting section 1981 suit by white plaintiff terminated because of marriage to minority spouse); Parr v. Woodmen of…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Chao v. Local 311, National Postal Mail Handlers Union
N.D. Tex. · 2001 · confidence medium
Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) John and Vincent Arduini Inc. v. Nynex
N.D.N.Y. · 2001 · confidence medium
Co., 427 U.S. 273, 279 , 96 S.Ct. 2574 , 49 L.Ed.2d 493 (1976); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jones v. Sabis Educational Systems, Inc.
N.D. Ill. · 1999 · confidence medium
However, other circuits hold that a person (even a white person) may state a claim under § 1981 if: (1) she was retaliated against for advocating the rights of, or associating with, minorities; and (2) she was the “direct target of defendant’s discriminatory action.” Benjamin v. Aroostook Medical Ctr., Inc., 57 F.3d 101, 105 (1st Cir.1995); see Albert v. Carovano, 851 F.2d 561, 572-73 (2d Cir.1988); Skinner v. Total Petroleum, Inc., 859 F.2d 1439, 1447 (10th Cir.1988); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986); Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Ticali v. Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn
E.D.N.Y · 1999 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
See Benjamin v. Aroostook Medi *266 cal Cir., Inc., 57 F.3d 101, 105 (1st Cir.1995); Carovano, 851 F.2d at 572-73 (holding that non-minority plaintiffs must identify with some particularity the nature of the Section 1981 rights being vindicated); cf. Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986) (allowing § 1981 suit by white female alleging that she was discharged because her husband was Iranian); Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins.
cited Cited as authority (rule) 77 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 1699, 74 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 45,510 Julie Deffenbaugh-Williams, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee
5th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986). 37 Concomitantly, we disagree with Wal-Mart's quite strained assertion that the relevant protected class is blacks.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Deffenbaugh-Williams v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
5th Cir. · 1998 · confidence medium
Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Khair v. Campbell Soup Co.
D.N.J. · 1995 · confidence medium
Daemi v. Church’s Fried Chicken, Inc., 931 F.2d 1379 , 1387 n. 7 (10th Cir.1991) (the concept of race extends to *330 matter of ancestry); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir. 1986) (even though Caucasian, Iranians protected under § 1981); Hussein v. Oshkosh Motor Truck Co., 816 F.2d 348, 352 (7th Cir.1987) (§ 1981 claim viable when plaintiff alleges he belongs to a group distinct from white citizens).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Chandler v. Fast Lane, Inc.
E.D. Ark. · 1994 · confidence medium
A white person’s right to associate with African-Americans is protected by § 1981. 14 Patrick v. Miller, 953 F.2d l240, 1249-50 (10th Cir.1992); Albert v. Carovano, 851 F.2d 561, 572 (2d - Cir.1988) (en banc); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986); Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Fair Employment Council of Greater Washington, Inc. v. Bmc Marketing Corporation, T/a Snelling & Snelling Personnel Consultants
D.C. Cir. · 1994 · signal: cf. · confidence medium
Cf., e.g., Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986) (recognizing cause of action under § 1981 where employer allegedly fired plaintiff because her husband was not white); Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Patrick v. Miller
10th Cir. · 1992 · confidence medium
DeMatteis v. Eastman Kodak Co., 511 F.2d 306, 312 (2d Cir.) (§ 1981 suit allowed where white employee alleged his company forced him to retire because he sold his house to a fellow black employee), modified on other grounds, 520 F.2d 409 (2d Cir.1975); Liotta v. National Forge Co., 629 F.2d 903, 906-07 (3d Cir.1980) (summary judgment inappropriate where material issues of fact remain regarding § 1981 claim brought by plaintiff allegedly discharged because he espoused the rights of company's black employees), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 970 , 101 S.Ct. 2045 , 68 L.Ed.2d 348 (1981); Fiedler v. Maru…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Patrick v. Miller
10th Cir. · 1992 · confidence medium
DeMatteis v. Eastman Kodak Co., 511 F.2d 306, 312 (2d Cir.) (§ 1981 suit allowed where white employee alleged his company forced him to retire because he sold his house to a fellow black employee), modified on other grounds, 520 F.2d 409 (2d Cir.1975); Liotta v. National Forge Co., 629 F.2d 903, 906-07 (3d Cir.1980) (summary judgment inappropriate where material issues of fact remain regarding § 1981 claim brought by plaintiff allegedly discharged because he espoused the rights of company’s black employees), cert. denied, 451 U.S. 970 , 101 S.Ct. 2045 , 68 L.Ed.2d 348 (1981); Fiedler v. Ma…
cited Cited as authority (rule) Holdeman v. Masters, Mates & Pilots Pension Plan
S.D. Tex. · 1990 · confidence medium
Alizadeh v. Safety Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986); see also, First Nat’l Bank of Ariz. v. Cities Serv.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) The Dartmouth Review, on Behalf of Its Officers, Staff and Subscribers v. Dartmouth College
1st Cir. · 1989 · confidence medium
White plaintiffs have been held to have stated a cause of action based on another person’s race only in situations where they can claim persecution arising out of some special circumstance, say, their refusal to engage in intentional discrimination, De Matteis v. Eastman Kodak Co., 511 F.2d 306, 312 , modified on other grounds, 520 F.2d 409 (2d Cir.1975), or their special relationship with a minority, Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986), or their advocacy of minority rights, Winston v. Lear-Siegler, Inc., 558 F.2d 1266, 1270 (6th Cir.1977).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Subhash C. MALHOTRA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COTTER & COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee (2×)
7th Cir. · 1989 · confidence medium
See, e.g., Skinner v. Total Petroleum, Inc., 859 F.2d 1439, 1447 (10th Cir.1988); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986); Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Vanguard Telecommunications, Inc. v. Southern New England Telephone Co.
D.N.J. · 1989 · confidence medium
See Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e); Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986) (party opposing a motion for summary judgment must counter a properly supported motion with specific factual disputes; mere general allegations are insufficient).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Albert v. Carovano
2d Cir. · 1988 · confidence medium
Under the caselaw, for example, non-minority plaintiffs may bring an action under Section 1981 against one who has retaliated against them because they did not engage in purposeful racial discrimination in a contractual or marital context, see, e.g., Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986) (allowing Section 1981 suit by white female alleging she was discharged because her husband was Iranian), Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Albert v. Carovano
2d Cir. · 1988 · confidence medium
Under the caselaw, for example, non-minority plaintiffs may bring an action under Section 1981 against one who has retaliated against them because they did not engage in purposeful racial discrim ination in a contractual or marital context, see, e.g., Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986) (allowing Section 1981 suit by white female alleging she was discharged because her husband was Iranian), Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Jackson v. University of Pittsburgh (2×)
3rd Cir. · 1987 · confidence medium
The record, including Jackson’s lengthy deposition, contains more than “a scrap of evidentiary material to support h[is] argument.” Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir. 1986).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) 44 Fair empl.prac.cas. 977, 44 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 37,376 Matthew E. Jackson, Jr. v. University of Pittsburgh, David C. Sullivan and Wesley W. Posvar, in Their Official and Individual Capacities (2×)
3rd Cir. · 1987 · confidence medium
The record, including Jackson's lengthy deposition, contains more than "a scrap of evidentiary material to support h[is] argument." Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986).
cited Cited as authority (rule) A.M. Jatoi, Md v. Hurst-Euless-Bedford Hospital Authority
5th Cir. · 1987 · confidence medium
Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 115 (5th Cir.1986) (adopting the analysis in Al-Kyazraji v. Saint Francis College, 784 F.2d 505 , 514-18 (3d Cir.1986)).
discussed Cited "see" Branch v. Jacobs (2×)
5th Cir. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 113 (5th Cir.1986); Zarnow v. City of Wichita Falls, Tex., 500 F.3d 401, 407 (5th Cir.2007).
discussed Cited "see" Chellen v. John Pickle Co., Inc.
N.D. Okla. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir.1986) (noting that persons of Iranian descent are a protected race under § 1981, although anthropologists classify them as Caucasian); Manzanares v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 593 F.2d 968, 971 (10th Cir.1979) (noting that § 1981 is “no[t] necessarily limited to the technical or restrictive meaning of ‘race’ ”)....
discussed Cited "see" Chellen v. John Pickle Co., Inc.
N.D. Okla. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir.1986) (noting that persons of Iranian descent are a protected race under § 1981, although anthropologists classify them as Caucasian); Manzanares v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 593 F.2d 968, 971 (10th Cir.1979) (noting that § 1981 is “no[t] necessarily limited to the technical or restrictive meaning of ‘race’ ”)....
discussed Cited "see" MacIntosh v. Building Owners & Managers Ass'n International
D.D.C. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Aliza-deh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111 , 114 (5th Cir.1986) (holding that the Caucasian wife of an Iranian man, who alleged that she had been fired because of the race of her husband, had a cause of action under § 1981); Winston v. Lear-Siegler, Inc., 558 F.2d 1266, 1270 (6th Cir.1977) (holding that a white employee had standing under § 1981 to sue former employer for discharging him in alleged retaliation for the employee’s protesting the supposedly discriminatory firing of an African-American co-worker).
discussed Cited "see" MacIntosh v. Building Owners & Managers Ass'n International
D.D.C. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111 , 114 (5th Cir.1986) (holding that the Caucasian wife of an Iranian man, who alleged that she had been fired because of the race of her husband, had a cause of action under § 1981); Winston v. Lear-Siegler, Inc., 558 F.2d 1266, 1270 (6th Cir.1977) (holding that a white employee had standing under § 1981 to sue former employer for discharging him in alleged retaliation for the employee’s protesting the supposedly discriminatory firing of an African-American coworker).
cited Cited "see" Evans v. The City of Houston
5th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986).
cited Cited "see" Johnson v. UC
6th Cir. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
Id. at 1270; see Alizadeh found whether or not the challenged practice ultimately is v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir. 1986) found to be unlawful.
cited Cited "see" Amro v. Boeing Co.
D. Kan. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986).
discussed Cited "see" Shinwari v. Raytheon Aircraft Co.
D. Kan. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir.1986) (noting that persons of Iranian descent are a protected race under § 1981, although anthropologists classify them as Caucasian); Manzanares v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 593 F.2d 968, 971 (10th Cir.1979) (noting that § 1981 is “no[t] necessarily limited to the technical or restrictive meaning of ‘race’ ”) [citation omitted].
discussed Cited "see" Acuna v. Regents of University of California (2×)
9th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Thorne v. City of El Segundo, 802 F.2d 111, 141 (9th Cir.1986) (citing Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434-435 ). 8 a.
discussed Cited "see" Ali DAEMI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHURCH’S FRIED CHICKEN, INC., Defendant-Appellee
10th Cir. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114-15 (5th Cir.1986) (noting that persons of Iranian descent are a protected race under § 1981, although anthropologists classify them as Caucasian); Manzanares v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 593 F.2d 968, 971 (10th Cir.1979) (noting that § 1981 is "no[t] necessarily limited to the technical or restrictive meaning of ‘race’ ”).
cited Cited "see" Susan A. Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc.
5th Cir. · 1990 · signal: see · confidence high
See Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111 (5th Cir.1986).
cited Cited "see" Liberty National Bank & Trust Co. of Louisville v. George
W.D. Ky. · 1987 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd., 793 F.2d 1380 (5th Cir.) reh’g en banc granted, 802 F.2d 111 (1986).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Blanks v. Lockheed Martin Corp.
S.D. Miss. · 2007 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111 (5th Cir.1986) (holding that if the white plaintiff was terminated because of her marriage to someone her employer considered to a nonwhite, the termination violated § 1981); Faraca v. Clements, 506 F.2d 956 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 422 U.S. 1006 , 95 S.Ct. 2627 , 45 L.Ed.2d 669 (1975) (implicitly holding that § 1981 provides a cause of action to a white spouse who alleges that he was discriminated against in employment because of his marriage to a nonwhite); Parr v. Woodmen of the World Life Ins.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Pisello v. Town of Brookhaven
E.D.N.Y · 1996 · signal: see also · confidence medium
Id., quoting, Sullivan v. Little Hunting Park, 396 U.S. 229, 237 , 90 S.Ct. 400, 404 , 24 L.Ed.2d 386 (1969) (where “a white person has been ‘... punished for trying to vindicate the rights of [non-white] minorities ...’ [that person] has standing to' sue under § 1981”); see also Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986) (finding standing where white female alleged that she was discharged because her husband was Iranian); Parr v. Woodmen of World Life Ins.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Benjamin v. Aroostook Medical Center, Inc.
1st Cir. · 1995 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 802 F.2d 111, 114 (5th Cir.1986) (white plaintiff fired because married to minority spouse); Winston, 558 F.2d at 1270 (white employee fired for advocating rights of minority); cf. Phelps v. Wichita Eagle-Beacon, 886 F.2d 1262, 1266-67 (10th Cir.1989) (white lawyer had standing under § 1981 to sue newspaper that published allegedly false articles about him because he represented minorities).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Jeetendra Bhandari v. First National Bank of Commerce
1st Cir. · 1987 · signal: see also · confidence medium
See Al-Khazraji v. Saint Francis College, 784 F.2d 505 , 517 (3d Cir.) (ethnic Arab can assert a claim for “racial" discrimination under § 1981), cert. granted, — U.S. -, 107 S.Ct. 62 , 93 L.Ed.2d 21 (1986); Shaare Tefila Congregation v. Cobb, 785 F.2d 523, 527 (4th Cir.) (discrimination against Jews not racial discrimination under § 1981), cert. granted, — U.S. —, 107 S.Ct. 62 , 93 L.Ed.2d 21 (1986); see also Alizadeh v. Safeway Stores, 802 F.2d 111, 115 (5th Cir.1986) (following Al-Khazraji). 7 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Susan A. ALIZADEH, and Her Husband, Hassan H. Alizadeh, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
SAFEWAY STORES, INC., and Local 455, United Food & Commercial Workers, AFL-CIO, Defendants-Appellees
85-2816.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Sep 26, 1986.
802 F.2d 111
David T. Lopez, Houston, Tex., for plaintiffs-appellants., Charles E. Fitch, Houston, Tex., for Safeway., Rick Bensik, Houston, Tex., for Local 455.
Rubin, Randall, Jolly.
Cited by 49 opinions  |  Published

OPINION

ALVIN B. RUBIN, Circuit Judge:

The principal issue presented is whether 42 U.S.C. § 1981 protects an Iranian national from discrimination by those who believe him to be of a race other than white. A woman and her husband, a native and citizen of Iran, sued her former employer and the union that was her collective bargaining agent on the grounds that (1) her discharge resulted from her employer’s prejudice against her husband because of his race and national origin, conduct proscribed by the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and (2) the union, in presenting her grievance, failed to perform its duty of fair representation in violation of § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947. The district court rendered summary judgments dismissing the claims. Because the plaintiffs have failed to show a basis for the husband’s claims, or for the wife’s claims against the union, and because the defendants have shown a factual basis for rejecting these claims, we affirm their dismissal. However, because the defendants have not shown any factual basis to warrant dismissing the wife’s § 1981 claim against the employer, we reverse the summary judgment in favor of the employer and remand for further proceedings as to the wife’s claim against it.

Susan Alizadeh was employed by Safeway Stores, Inc. as a grocery cashier.[*113] Safeway fired her following allegations by her store manager that she had stolen money from a cash register. Mrs. Alizadeh asserts that the charge is untrue, and contends that the real reason for her dismissal was the store manager’s “racial prejudice” against her husband because he is considered by the defendants “as a member of a race other than White.” She also alleges in her complaint that two weeks prior to her discharge, Safeway’s manager approached her husband “in an open display of racial hatred.”

After her discharge, Mrs. Alizadeh complained of discrimination to her union. The union filed a grievance and made an investigation. During its investigation, the union was shown a video film taken by Safeway that showed an employee, allegedly Mrs. Alizadeh, taking money from a cash register and putting it in her pocket. The union then withdrew the grievance and did not seek arbitration.

Mrs. Alizadeh and her husband brought this action against Safeway and the union, Local 455, United Food and Commercial Workers, AFL-CIO, asserting claims against both under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 [1] and the Civil Rights Act of 1866. [2] Mrs. Alizadeh contends that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the racial discrimination claim against her employer. She further argues that this error prevented the court from adequately considering her claim that the union had breached its duty of fair representation discriminatorily in processing her grievance.

The brief, filed only in Mrs. Alizadeh’s name, does not raise any issues to indicate that the summary judgment against her husband was erroneous. He was not an employee of Safeway and shows no basis for a claim against it. Nor was he a union member. His complaint was properly dismissed.

Likewise, the district court properly dismissed Mrs. Alizadeh’s § 301 claims. Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. [3] The union supported its motion with affidavits and depositions that revealed that its decision not to seek arbitration was based on the video film. Mrs. Alizadeh has failed to provide a scrap of evidentiary material to support her argument to the contrary. The bare-bone allegations in her brief and pleadings are insufficient to withstand summary judgment. A party opposing a motion for summary judgment must counter a properly supported motion with specific, factual disputes: Mere general allegations are not sufficient. [4] A close look at Mrs. Alizadeh’s pleadings reveals that her real contention is that she is entitled to have the union demand arbitration of her grievance regardless of its merit. We have held, however, that a union has no such duty. It is required only to represent members of the. collective bargaining unit fairly and in good faith. [5] The union has shown that it made such an effort. The district court, therefore, properly dismissed the § 301 claim against the union. And absent a finding that the union breached its duty of fair representation, Mrs. Alizadeh’s § 301 claim against Safeway was likewise properly dismissed.

The district court did not give any reason for dismissing Mrs. Alizadeh’s § 1981 claim. However, because Safeway’s motion for summary judgment was unsupported by either affidavits or depositions and because the facts are disputed, particu[*114] larly Safeway’s motivation in firing Mrs. Alizadeh, the district court must have granted summary judgment on the ground that she failed to state a claim for which relief might be granted. In so holding, the court must have reached one of two possible conclusions: either (1) that Mrs. Alizadeh could not state a claim under § 1981 for discrimination directed toward her husband, or (2) that Mrs. Alizadeh could not state a claim under § 1981 because women who are married to Iranians are not protected by that statute. We find neither rationale sufficient.

Mrs. Alizadeh alleges that she is a white female and that her husband, who is of Iranian national origin, is “considered by Defendants ... as [a] member of a race other than White.” Safeway characterizes her claim as one premised not on racial but on national-origin discrimination and correctly contends that § 1981 proscribes only racial discrimination. [6] However, Mrs. Alizadeh’s § 1981 claim on its face is not based on national origin alone. She invokes the literal language of § 1981, alleging that she was discriminated against because Safeway’s manager considered her husband to be of “a race other than White.” If Safeway did indeed discriminate against her because of her marriage to someone considered to be a nonwhite, it violated § 1981, for in Faraca v. Clements 7 we implicitly held that § 1981 provides a cause of action to a white spouse who alleges that he was discriminated against in employment because of his marriage to a nonwhite. Safeway submitted no evidentiary material, and therefore there is nothing to warrant the conclusion that it did not discriminate against Mrs. Alizadeh because of her marital relationship and its manager’s alleged prejudice against nonwhites.

The second possible ground for the district court’s holding presents a question we have never decided: whether a woman who is married to an Iranian and who has been discriminated against because her husband is considered by a prejudiced person to be nonwhite is entitled to the protection of § 1981. That section, the text of which is set forth in full in the footnote, [8] entitles “all persons” to the same right “to make and enforce contracts” and “to the full and equal benefit of all laws ... as is enjoyed by white citizens.” Enacted as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, § 1981 was doubtless adopted originally as a means of protecting the civil rights of the former black slaves. But its language is not so confined, and in McDonald v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co 9 the Supreme Court rejected the argument that the statute protects only blacks, holding that white plaintiffs alleging reverse discrimination could maintain a claim under the statute.

The mutability and indefiniteness of racial classifications make it difficult to distinguish between those racial groups the statute protects and those “white citizens” with whom they are entitled to equality. We have recognized the difficulty of differentiating between racial discrimination and discrimination based on national origin in refusing to decide whether Mexican-Americans are protected by § 1981. [10] Anthropol[*115] ogists classify Iranians as Caucasians, However, we do not think that a taxonomical definition of race is in keeping with the rationale of McDonald.

In a full discussion, to which we could add little, the Third Circuit has held in Al-Khazraji v. Saint Francis College [11] that ethnic Arabs are a protected minority entitled to invoke § 1981 against discrimination. That opinion and the concurrence of Judge Arlin Adams discuss the issue fully. Judge Adams doubted that the statute should be so construed, but considered himself bound by McDonald. After reviewing both the history of the Act and current interpretations, the majority held that “Congress’s purpose was to ensure that all persons be treated equally, without regard to color or race, which we understand to embrace, at the least, membership in a group that is ethnically and physiognomically distinctive.” [12] Mrs. Alizadeh’s husband was allegedly considered by the defendant to be of a “race other than white,” and we cannot say that he is any less ethnically and physiognomically distinctive, as compared to a “white,” than was the Iraqi in Al-Khazraji.

Mrs. Alizadeh charges that in addition the defendants considered her husband nonwhite and discriminated against her because of her marriage to such a person. Because neither party has filed any affidavits or depositions addressed to this issue, we must assume that Mrs. Alizadeh can prove her allegations.

We, therefore, VACATE the summary judgment insofar as it dismissed Mrs. Alizadeh’s § 1981 claim against Safeway and REMAND the case to the district court for further proceedings. Because she has alleged no facts that, if proven, would support a § 301 claim against the union, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the union. Our action does not preclude the rendition of summary judgment if appropriate evidentiary materials are filed showing that there is no genuine dispute on any material fact as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 56.

3

. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Fontenot v. Upjohn Co., 780 F.2d 1190, 1194 (5th Cir.1986).

4

. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e); see also First Natl Bank of Ariz. v. Cities Serv. Co., 391 U.S. 253, 289, 88 S.Ct. 1575, 1592-93, 20 L.Ed.2d 569 (1968); Galindo v. Precision Am. Corp., 754 F.2d 1212, 1216 (5th Cir.1985).

5

. See Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171, 193-94, 87 S.Ct. 903, 918-19, 17 L.Ed.2d 842 (1967); Cox v. C.H. Masland & Sons, Inc., 607 F.2d 138, 144-45 (5th Cir.1979).

6

. See Olivares v. Martin, 555 F.2d 1192, 1196 (5th Cir.1977).

7

. 506 F.2d 956 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 422 U.S. 1006, 95 S.Ct. 2627, 45 L.Ed.2d 669 (1975).

8

. All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.

42 U.S.C. § 1981 (1982).

10

. See Vasquez v. McAllen Bag & Supply Co., 660 F.2d 686, 687 (5th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 458 U.S. 1122, 102 S.Ct. 3509, 73 S.Ct. 1384 (1982) (citing Bullard v. Omi Georgia, Inc., 640 F.2d 632, 634 (5th Cir.1981)); cf. Gonzalez v. Stanford Applied Eng'g, 597 F.2d 1298, 1299-1300 (9th Cir.1979); Manzanares v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 593 F.2d 968, 970-71 (10th Cir.1979). See generally 2 J. Cook & J. Sobieski, Jr., Civil Rights Actions jflf 5.08, 5.09 (1985).

11

. 784 F.2d 505, 514-18 (3d Cir.1986).

12

. Id. at 517. See also Tayyari v. New Mexico State Univ., 495 F.Supp. 1365 (D.N.M.1980); Khawaja v. Wyatt, 494 F.Supp. 302 (W.D.N.Y. 1980). But see Ibrahim v. New York State Dep’t of Health, 581 F.Supp. 228 (E.D.N.Y.1984).