Skip to content
Pamela Y. Price Logo
  • Home
  • About
  • Reviews
  • Pamela’s Page
  • Book Pamela!
  • Signature Cases
  • Contact

Morgan v. Amtrak

Home/Signature Cases/Morgan v. Amtrak
Previous Next

Morgan v. Amtrak

  • Attorney Pamela Y. Price, Abner Morgan and Attorney Howard Moore, Jr. inside the United States Supreme Court
  • On the steps of the United States Supreme Court Front Row: Attorney Howard Moore, Jr., Pamela Y. Price, Eleanore J. Pitman, Attorney John L. Burris Back Row: Attorney William C. McNeill, Attorney Jane Bond Moore, Abner Morgan
  • Front Row: Attorney Howard Moore, Jr., Pamela Y. Price, Mildred Price, David Price. Second Row: Attorney John L. Burris, Attorney William C. McNeill, Eleanor J. Pitman Back Row: Abner Morgan, Jr, Robin Morgan, Vernon Crawley
  • Abner J. Morgan, Jr., Attorney Pamela Y. Price, Attorney Howard Moore, Jr., Attorney William C. McNeill inside the United States Supreme Court

On June 10, 2002, WE WON Morgan v. Amtrak!!!! In a historic decision, Justice Clarence Thomas and the United States Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in favor of Abner Morgan, Jr., an African-American electrician who suffered racial discrimination, racial harassment and retaliation at Amtrak’s Oakland Yard.

To hear the oral argument at the Supreme Court.

On May 27, 2004, WE WON AGAIN!!!! A federal jury in San Francisco awarded $500,000 to Mr. Morgan in Morgan v. Amtrak. Mr. Morgan worked at Amtrak’s Oakland maintenance yard from 1990 until 1995. During his employment at the yard, Amtrak’s supervisors discriminated against Mr. Morgan and numerous other African-American employees in training opportunities and work assignments, and singled out anyone who complained about the unfair treatment with harsh disciplinary actions.

 

 

 

In 1998, a jury of four women and four men heard the case in San Francisco, presided over by U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston. In rendering a verdict for Amtrak, the jury also delivered a note which criticized Amtrak’s managers for “grossly unprofessional and questionable ethical conduct.” The jury also found that the response from Amtrak’s EEO Office was “woefully remiss.”

In 2000, the Ninth Circuit reversed the jury’s verdict and ordered a new trial. The Ninth Circuit directed Judge Illston to allow the jury to consider all of the evidence of a hostile environment and retaliation which occurred throughout Mr. Morgan’s employment as part of a continuing violation. The Court held that the evidence at trial established “a series or pattern of discrimination, retaliation and hostile environment that started nearly contemporaneously with Morgan’s employment and continued throughout his tenure.”

The Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit decision with respect to Mr. Morgan’s hostile environment claim and the order for a new trial, but held that the continuing violation doctrine cannot be applied to discrete acts. The Supreme Court’s decision means that any employee who thinks that he or she has been a victim of discrimination or retaliation must promptly file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) every time something happens. The message for employees is to file your EEOC complaint early and often.

The Supreme Court’s decision represents a decisive victory for victims of persistent or pervasive harassment in the workplace. Those who can show a hostile environment will be entitled to recover damages for all of the conduct and the harm suffered.

And most importantly, Abner Morgan, Jr. won the right to have a fair trial and finally claimed the victory!!!

By Pamela|2020-04-19T08:09:18+00:00May 29th, 2004|Signature Cases|Comments Off on Morgan v. Amtrak

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

FacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditGoogle+TumblrPinterestVkEmail
Pamela Y. Price
Rated by Super Lawyers


loading ...
Pamela Y. Price
Rated by Super Lawyers


loading ...

Articles

Eradicating Sexual Harassment in Education, MacKinnon & Siegel (Eds.), New Directions in Sexual Harassment Law, Yale Press (2004)

Contributing Editor, California Practice Guide: Employment Litigation, Chapter 10, Harassment, The Rutter Group (2006)

Published Opinions

Freitag v. CDC - 468 F. 3d 528 (9th Cir. 2006), 127 S. Ct. 1918 (2007).

Walker v. County of Contra Costa (N.D.Cal. 2005) 227 F.R.D. 529.

Taylor v. Beth Eden Baptist Church & Gillette O. James (N.D. Cal. 2003) 294 F.Supp.2d 1074

Morgan v. Amtrak, 232 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir. 2000), 536 U.S. 101, S. Ct. 1516 (2002).

Jones v. K-Mart, et al. (1998) 17 Cal.4th 3298.

Nicole M. v. Martinez Unified School District (N.D.Cal. 1997) 964 F.Supp. 1369.

Patricia H. v. Berkeley Unified School District, et al. (N.D.Cal. 1993) 830 F.Supp.1288.

Beneficial Finance, Inc. v. Durkee (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 912.

Wilson v. U.S. Postal Service (1987) 32 M.S.P.R. 244.

Wilson v. MSPB (Fed.Cir. 1986) 807 F.2d 1577.

Pierre C. v. Superior Court (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 1120.

 
Northern California
 

Get Social

Tweets by PPriceCares
Pamela Price, Democratic Party Central Committee Member

Connect with pamela

Pamela Y. Price, Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 5843
Oakland 94605
hope@pypesq.com
Phone: 510-452-0292
Fax: 510-452-5625

10.0Pamela Yvette Price
Pamela Y. Price
Rated by Super Lawyers


loading ...

Let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father in heaven. Matthew 5:16

Copyright © 2017 Pamela Y. Price, Attorney At Law · All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: This website is Attorney Advertising. No prior result in a case guarantees a similar outcome. Each case we handle is individual with different facts and therefore every case is different. The materials on this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact an attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this website or any of the pages or links within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Attorney Pamela Price and the user or browser. No attorney-client relationship occurs unless and until you sign an agreement confirming the nature and scope of representation.

Toggle Sliding Bar Area
Thank you for reaching out to Attorney Pamela Price. We are excited about her recent landslide election to the Alameda County Democratic Party Central Committee. We appreciate your interest and look forward to building a relationship with you. Have a great day!

Sign up to stay in touch!

Sign up to get early news about Attorney Pamela Price's activities.

By submitting this form, you are granting: Attorney PAMELA Y. PRICE, 7677 Oakport Drive, Oakland, California, 94621, United States, http://www.pypesq.com permission to email you. You may unsubscribe via the link found at the bottom of every email. (See our Email Privacy Policy for details.) Emails are serviced by Constant Contact.

 
Pamela Y. Price
 
 
Northern California
 
The National Black Lawyers