In minority police officers' disparate impact race claim under Title VII against a state agency that prepares and administers promotional examinations for local police officers under the state civil service system, their employers, various cities, and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), district court's denial of Eleventh Amendment immunity for the state defendants, the state of Massachusetts and a chief human resources officers of the Human Resources Division (HRD) in his official capacity, is reversed where: 1) the state defendants do not qualify as employers as that term is used in Title VII; 2) HRD cannot be deemed plaintiffs' de facto employer as it exercised no control, direct or indirect, over the factors relevant to the common law agency test; and 3) plaintiffs' alternate theories why HRD should be considered their employer under Title VII are rejected.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Decided December 3, 2009
Before: Lynch, Chief Judge, Torruella and Howard, Circuit Judges
Opinion by Lynch, Chief Judge
For Appellant: Sookyoung Shin, Assistant Attorney General, Robert L. Quinan, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Martha Coakley, Attorney General of Massachusetts
For Appellee: Harold Lichten, Leah Berrault and Lichten & Liss-Riordan, P.C.