Miriam Taylor v. Fulton County, Georgia, No. 12-10052 (11th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-10052 Date Filed: 01/24/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 12-10052 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:08-cv-03242-RLV-CCH MIRIAM TAYLOR, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FULTON COUNTY, GEORGIA, Defendant - Appellant, SHERRIFF MYRON E. FREEMAN, Individually and in his Official capacity as the Fulton County Sheriff, et al., Defendants. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ________________________ (January 24, 2013) Before BARKETT and JORDAN, Circuit Judges, and SCHLESINGER, * District Judge. * Honorable Harvey E. Schlesinger, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Florida, sitting by designation. Case: 12-10052 Date Filed: 01/24/2013 Page: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Fulton County appeals from a final judgment after a jury verdict in favor of Miriam Taylor on her claims of sexual harassment and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Taylor also asserted a claim pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Fulton County now appeals various orders of the district court arguing that it (1) improperly concluded that Taylor filed a charge of discrimination within the 180-day filing period required by Title VII; (2) erred in ruling that Fulton County was Taylor s legal employer for the purposes of Title VII and § 1983 liability; (3) erred by denying its motion for a bifurcated trial, allowing inadmissible testimony, and quashing subpoenas issued to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ). Having reviewed this record, we find no merit to Fulton County s arguments: (1) Fulton County failed to deny with particularity Taylor s assertion that she had timely filed her complaint with the EEOC as required by Rule 9(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; (2) Fulton County admitted on several occasions before the district court that it was Taylor s employer; and (3) we cannot say, on this record, that the district court abused its discretion in issuing the various orders complained of by Fulton County. AFFIRMED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
