Supreme Court declines to review shopper discrimination case against Dillard's

WASHINGTON (AP) _ The Supreme Court refused Tuesday to consider making it harder for shoppers to sue stores claiming discrimination. <br><br>Justices declined to review a $1.2 million verdict against the

Tuesday, February 19th 2002, 12:00 am

By: News On 6

WASHINGTON (AP) _ The Supreme Court refused Tuesday to consider making it harder for shoppers to sue stores claiming discrimination.

Justices declined to review a $1.2 million verdict against the department chain Dillard's Inc., which was accused of keeping a black woman from claiming a cologne sample.

Stores frequently fend off customer complaints. Dillard's wanted the court to set boundaries for lawsuits under a federal civil rights law.

The Arkansas-based chain has been involved in multiple discrimination lawsuits. It agreed last year to settle discrimination complaints by Kansas and Missouri employees and has faced customer lawsuits in other states, including Arkansas, Iowa, and Texas. In a Texas case, Dillard's agreed to pay an undisclosed amount to the family of a black customer who died after being beaten and hogtied at a store while being arrested.

Dillard's had been sued in this case by Paula Hampton after she was detained by a guard in 1996 for suspicion of shoplifting at a store in Overland Park, Kan., a suburb of Kansas City.

She had just bought an Easter outfit for her niece's 1-year-old son and was redeeming a coupon for men's cologne samples when the guard interrupted the transaction and said ``the ... black female had been observed placing something in her coat,'' according to the store's report.

Dillard's appeal turned on whether the incident, involving an inexpensive perfume sample, violated a federal law designed to stop discrimination in contracts.

Carter Phillips, the Washington attorney representing the store, said courts have interpreted the law differently, creating an ``intolerable situation.''

``Neither consumers nor retailers are subject to uniform rights and obligations throughout the country,'' he wrote in urging the court to take the case.

An all-white jury awarded Hampton $56,000 in actual damages and $1.1 million in punitive damages. A divided panel of the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the decision.

The Dillard's security guard checked the bag and receipt and found no evidence of stolen goods. Hampton was shopping with her niece and four children at the time.

Dillard's argued that Hampton could have gone to collect her cologne after the five-minute encounter. Her lawyers say she was too distressed and embarrassed

She did return to the fragrance counter to get the name and phone number of the clerk, the store's lawyer told the Supreme Court.

Hampton was given the cologne coupon after buying the Easter outfit. The jury determined that the coupon gave her the right to sue for a contract violation.

Attorney Arthur A. Benson II of Kansas City said the case is about racial profiling and harassment.

``Dillard's now argues that it needs guidance from this court that would, for instance, authorize its stores to engage in intentional race discrimination against customers,'' Benson, representing Hampton, wrote in a court filing.

Phillips said courts are wrongly combining contract interference with race discrimination. The event might have been unpleasant, he wrote, but it wasn't a contract violation.

The case is Dillard Department Stores Inc. v. Hampton, 01-842.