Opinion ID: 389939
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Structuring of Issues for Consideration on Remand

Text: 25 On remand, the parties expressed varying views as to the proper scope of the new proceedings. BFME, apparently envisioning a completely new trial of all the issues in the case, served on plaintiffs requests for more than 180 admissions of fact, ranging from the basic concept of civil service hiring, to the validation of the 1975 test, 5 to the state of employment discrimination law in this Circuit. Plaintiffs and the City set considerably narrower sights. The City stated that it wished to submit further evidence on three issues that it described as follows: 26 1. The effect on disparate impact if the passing score is reduced from 12 to 6 and differential adjustments are made. 27 2. Adopt a plan which accepts the score reduction and treats this list as a qualifying list without ranking, subject to passing physical and medical examinations, which would afford substantial minority representation on the Fire Department. 28 3. Whether the City has a long history of notorious discriminatory practices in its hiring policies? 29 Plaintiffs, expressly reserving their position that the City could not avoid liability by manipulation of the passing score after having been found to have discriminated, stated that they had no objection to presentation of further evidence on the City's first and third issues, nor on the second to the extent that it simply reflected the City's position with respect to remedy. Plaintiffs proposed, in addition, to submit evidence with respect to the current manpower needs and vacancies within the fire department, and with respect to Title VI. As to the latter, plaintiffs stated as follows: 30 After the trial in this case the Supreme Court addressed issues relating to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000d, et seq., issues which are raised in the pleadings in this case. The record is not clear with respect to the relevance of Title VI to this case, in that there is no evidence relating to receipt of federal funds by the City other than Revenue Sharing funds. The record should be developed on this issue, by having the record reflect the City's receipt of funds, in order to avoid the necessity for a remand at some future time. 31 In a prehearing order, the district court reviewed the directions given by this Court on the first appeal and determined that a broad-ranging evidentiary hearing was uncalled for. Directing that any additional evidence be limited to that suggested by this Court's opinion and that necessitated by the passage of time since the district court's original remedy order, Judge Daly ruled that the issues as to which supplementary evidence would be permitted were the effect of the interim hiring orders, the effect of lowering the passing score on the 1975 exam, and the present personnel needs of the fire department. Discovery on other issues was denied. The court stated that further findings with respect to the appropriateness of quota relief would be based on the prior record. 32