Preview:

41, September Term, 1996 LOOC, Inc. d/b/a Domino's Pizza and Domino's Pizza, Inc. v. Prabhjot S. Kohli

[Holding That The Maryland Commission On Human Relations, Under The Circumstances, Had No Right To A Preliminary Injunction Requiring Compliance With The Commission's Decision, Prior To The Completion Of Judicial Review In The Circuit Court]

In the Circuit Court for Baltimore County CA 03-C-96-1431

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 41 September Term, 1996 ______________________________________________

LOOC, INC. d/b/a DOMINO'S PIZZA and DOMINO'S PIZZA, INC. v. PRABHJOT S. KOHLI ______________________________________________ * Murphy, C.J., Eldridge Rodowsky * Karwacki Bell Raker Smith, Marvin H. (Retired, Specially Assigned), JJ. ______________________________________________ Opinion by Eldridge, J. ____________________________________________ Filed: October 9, 1997 *Murphy, C.J., and Karwacki, J., participated in the hearing of this case while active members of this Court; after being recalled pursuant to the Constitution, Article IV, Section 3A, they also participated in the decision and the adoption of this opinion.

This appeal is from an order of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County requiring the petitioners, LOOC, Inc. and Domino's Pizza, Inc., immediately to comply with a decision and order of the Maryland Commission on Human Relations.1 Because the circuit court, under the circumstances, erred in ordering compliance with the Commission's decision and order at this stage in the proceedings, we shall reverse. I. The controversy began in December 1987, when Prabhjot Kohli applied for a job with Domino as a manager in training. Domino denied his application under a company-wide nobeard policy because Mr. Kohli refused to shave his beard, which he wears for religious reasons. In January 1988, Mr. Kohli filed a complaint with the Maryland Human Relations Commission, asserting that rejection of his employment application under these circumstances constituted religious discrimination. After lengthy administrative and judicial review proceedings, and after the case was remanded back to the Commission by the Circuit Court for Baltimore County,2 the Commission's Appeal Board on January 17, 1996, issued a final administrative decision and order pursuant to Maryland Code (1957, 1994 Repl. Vol., 1997 Supp.), Art. 49B,

Download LOOC v. Kohli.pdf

Maryland Law