## Facts

- Samuel Taylor, a Black employee, was hired by Safeway to work at its Denver frozen-food warehouse on December 1, 1968, and was discharged about three weeks later for alleged inadequate performance.
- In January 1969, Taylor filed discrimination charges with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission and the EEOC; the state agency found no actionable discrimination, while the EEOC found reasonable cause to believe Title VII was violated.
- After receiving a right-to-sue notice, Taylor filed suit (Apr. 20, 1971) under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, seeking to proceed individually and as a class representative for Black persons employed or employable at Safeway facilities throughout Colorado.
- The district court dismissed the § 1981 claim for failure to exhaust Title VII remedies and narrowed the proposed class to Black employees at the Denver frozen-food warehouse based on Rule 23(a)(3) typicality.
- After trial, the district court found no discrimination as to hiring, training, or refusal to transfer, but found Taylor’s discharge was racially motivated based on a biased supervisor’s manipulation of assignments affecting production measures.
- The district court awarded Taylor back pay and attorney’s fees on the individual claim, denied reinstatement, limited back pay to Jan. 16, 1969 through Sept. 25, 1969 (ending when Taylor became a full-time student), and rejected class-wide relief and class-related attorney’s fees.

## Issues

1. Whether a plaintiff must exhaust Title VII administrative remedies before maintaining a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
2. Whether the district court properly limited the class to Black employees at the Denver frozen-food warehouse under Rule 23(a)(3) typicality.
3. Whether the district court properly limited individual relief, including the back-pay period and denial of reinstatement, after finding discriminatory discharge under Title VII.
4. Whether denial of class-wide relief and class-related attorney’s fees was proper given the proof presented and the fee-shifting purposes of Title VII.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
- The court reversed the dismissal of the § 1981 claim, holding § 1981 provides an independent remedy not conditioned on Title VII exhaustion.
- The court affirmed the limitation of the class to Black employees at the Denver frozen-food warehouse, finding no abuse of discretion under Rule 23(a)(3).
- The court upheld the finding that Taylor’s discharge was racially motivated and that he was entitled to individual relief, but remanded for reconsideration of aspects of the remedy, including back pay and related equitable relief.
- The court largely sustained rejection of class-wide discrimination relief, but directed further consideration of attorney’s fees in light of statutory purposes and the degree of success.

## Legal Principles

- Title VII administrative exhaustion is not a prerequisite to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1981; § 1981 and Title VII operate as parallel, independent avenues for relief for race discrimination.
- Under Rule 23(a)(3), a class representative’s claims must be typical of the class; differences in facilities, supervision, and employment practices can justify narrowing a proposed employment class.
- Title VII remedies are equitable and aim to make the victim whole; back pay is a primary remedy subject to mitigation and equitable limits that must be justified by the record.
- Reinstatement is a favored equitable remedy for discriminatory discharge; denial requires a reasoned basis tied to equitable considerations.
- Attorney’s fees under Title VII serve private enforcement goals; fee determinations should account for degree of success and may require careful allocation where individual and class components yield different results.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit held that § 1981 claims are not barred by failure to exhaust Title VII remedies, upheld the district court’s narrowing of the class for lack of typicality, affirmed liability for discriminatory discharge, and remanded for reconsideration of remedial issues—particularly back pay, equitable relief, and attorney’s fees consistent with Title VII’s remedial and enforcement purposes.


Taylor v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 524 F.2d 263 (10th Cir. 1975)