Hishon v. King - Significance
Elizabeth Anderson Hishon
King & Spalding, an Atlanta, Georgia, law firm
That Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not apply to the selection of partners for partnerships.
Chief Lawyer for Petitioner
Emmet J. Bondurant II
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
Charles Morgan, Jr.
Justices for the Court
Harry A. Blackmun, William J. Brennan, Jr., Warren E. Burger (writing for the Court), Thurgood Marshall, Sandra Day O'Connor, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William H. Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens, Byron R. White
Date of Decision
31 October 1983
That Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did apply to Hishon's complaint of discrimination by King & Spalding in their refusal to offer her a partnership.
- Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (1989).
- White v. Union Pacific R.R., 805 F.Supp. 883 (1992).
- "Getting a Piece of the Power: Women Barred From Partnerships Can Now Go To Court." Time, 4 June 1984.
- "High Court Opinion Hits Partnerships." Dun's Business Month, July 1984.
- Horton v. Goose Creek Independent School District - Significance, Search And Seizure In The Schools, Further Readings
- et al. Heckler v. Mathews - Question Of Gender Based Classification, Individual Rights And Congressional Intent, Circumvention Of Legislative Intent, Impact
- Hishon v. King - Significance
- Other Free Encyclopedias