1. Are you surprised that this is a 2005 case? Explain.

2. Given the evidence, do you understand why the lower court would have found that no race discrimination had taken place? Explain.

3. What do you think of the statements that management allegedly made? Do they seem like appropriate bases for making workplace decisions? Explain.

Issue: Whether the manager’s decision of refusing to hire a qualified black poker dealer, because card players do not want blacks to touch their cards, is illegal discrimination.

Facts: A better-than-average black poker dealer with a good deal of experience sued a casino for refusing to hire him over an eight-year period, alleging it was only because of his race. The human resources person testified that the manager said the white players would not want someone black handling their cards.

Decision: Yes, this is illegal discrimination.