Eighth Circuit: Police Officer Trainee not Limited to Title VII for Bringing Discrimination Claim
1 min read
Aug 1, 2012
In Hensley v. Sgt. Bill Brown et al., No. 11-2561, (8th Cir. July 25, 2012), a police-officer trainee claimed that while in the police academy, she was repeatedly subjected to sexually harassing comments, discriminatory actions, and physical assault by her male trainers. The trainers subsequently issued a memorandum which indicated that she would not be graduating from the academy. She then left the academy and was unable to become a police officer.
She then sued the city board of police commissioners and various individual officers claiming that she had been discriminated against in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and for violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Issues arose with respect to whether she exhausted her administrative remedies under Title VII and whether she was limited to seeking redress for these grievances under Title VII only .
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reasoned that Title VII provides the exclusive remedy for violations of its own terms and an employee seeking relief under this provision must comply with the act’s procedural requirements. Further, though an employee may not invoke a purely remedial statute (such as 42 U.S.C. § 1983) to redress a right conferred only by Title VII, where an employer’s conduct violates Title VII as well as rights conferred by an independent source, “Title VII supplements, rather than supplants, existing remedies for employment discrimination.”
Thus, the Eighth Circuit found that although Title VII provided the exclusive remedy for the trainee’s discrimination claims, its exclusivity ceased when the employer’s conduct also amounted to a violation of a constitutional right. So, where the employee asserted a violation of a constitutional right, she could sue under Section 1983 alone without having to plead a Title VII violation and comply with the act’s procedural requirements.
There exists a host of federal and state law providing bases for employees to make claims of discrimination. For that reason, it is important for employers to be aware of the employment and civil rights laws in their jurisdiction to ensure compliance with all applicable law.
Topics
Featured Insights

Press Release
Nov 13, 2026
Hinshaw Advises Client Safe Harbor Capital Partners in $44 Million Financing

In The News
Nov 12, 2026
Spencer Kook Authors Article Providing a Claims Manager’s Guide to Class Action Exposure

In The News
Nov 12, 2026
Mitch Chargo Discusses Cannabis M&A Implications in a Post-Rescheduling Landscape

Webinar
Nov 12, 2026
Michael Adams Presents on Navigating Ethics in the Digital Age

Event
Nov 12, 2026
Cathy Mulrow-Peattie Discusses AI and Supply Chain Cybersecurity

Healthcare Alert
Nov 11, 2026
Illinois Enacts 340B Contract Pharmacy Protections: 7 Steps Covered Entities Should Take

In The News
Nov 10, 2026
Brian Turetsky Examines How NYC’s Proposed POWER Act Could Expand Private UDAAP Claims

In The News
Nov 9, 2026
Kate Schnake Examines Unlawful Discrimination vs. Legitimate Advocacy in Jury Selection

Press Release
Nov 6, 2026
Hinshaw Recognized by the LCLD as a 2026 Compass Award Winner and Top Performer

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Nov 5, 2026
FDIC Proposes State Bank Preemption Parity Rule Regarding Host State Laws


