A federal jury in Detroit delivered a $6.3 million verdict on Thursday against The Detroit Club and its owner, finding they retaliated against three former employees who complained that the downtown private club enforced its dress code more harshly against Black visitors. The decision capped a trial that stretched for more than a week and zeroed in on surveillance video, witness testimony and internal paperwork about how guests were treated at the historic venue.
According to the Detroit Free Press, jurors sided with the former staffers after hearing that employees who raised concerns about the club’s treatment of Black guests wound up written up, pushed out or otherwise punished. The Free Press reports that the three plaintiffs sought damages for retaliation tied to complaints about what they described as race-based enforcement of the club’s dress-code rules.
The lawsuit, Ferrer v. Detroit Club Management Corp., was filed in 2022 and names plaintiffs Maria Victoria Ferrer, Charles Lisée and Miya Shani Hooks. Defendants include Detroit Club Management Corporation, owner Lynn Uralli and a former front-office manager. Court filings outline claims brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and Michigan’s Elliott‑Larsen Civil Rights Act, and show that several retaliation and discrimination counts made it all the way to trial. The case record contains the complaints, pretrial rulings and other filings.
What jurors heard
Inside the courtroom, jurors watched surveillance video, heard from managers and staff, and reviewed documentary evidence that plaintiffs said showed both inconsistent enforcement of the club’s posted dress code and retaliatory discipline after employees complained. Law360 reported that testimony from front-desk workers and servers, paired with records and video, formed the backbone of the plaintiffs’ case.
Court filings describe the club’s posted policy and dress-code language, which bars sneakers, ripped jeans, hoodies, work boots and baseball caps, and plaintiffs told jurors that the rule was not applied the same way to everyone, depending on a guest’s race. The federal judge’s August 27, 2025 summary-judgment opinion tracks those allegations and leaves the retaliation and several discrimination claims for a jury to decide, according to the court documents.
Legal and business fallout
Now that the jury has spoken, the next move belongs to the judge, who will enter a formal judgment. From there, the defendants can file post-trial motions or take the fight to the appellate court, steps that can affect both the timing and the final outcome of any award. Federal court guidance explains that either side can pursue post-judgment motions and appeals under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, a familiar path in high-stakes civil cases.
The potential payout, along with unflattering headlines, is poised to create business and reputational headaches for the club while the legal process continues. Similar retaliation and discrimination suits in Michigan and beyond have recently led to settlements and court rulings, a trend that employment-law reporters say is putting fresh pressure on private clubs, restaurants and hotels to take a hard look at how they enforce appearance and conduct rules. Coverage of recent Michigan matters provides additional context for that broader pattern.
The Detroit Club lists its downtown address as 712 Cass Ave., Detroit, MI 48226 on its website, and the case played out in federal court at the Theodore Levin U.S. Courthouse in Detroit. That courthouse, home to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, stands at 231 W. Lafayette Blvd., where the clerk’s office maintains case records.
Legal implications
The jury’s award centers on retaliation claims, meaning protection for employees who complain about discrimination, and the case was tried under § 1981, Title VII and Michigan’s Elliott‑Larsen Civil Rights Act, according to the court record. If the judgment survives any post-trial challenges, the club and any individual defendants found liable could face collection efforts and possible further proceedings on fees, interest or post-verdict motions. If the defendants appeal, the Sixth Circuit would be asked to review any alleged legal errors.
Employment-law analysts say the verdict highlights how courts and juries are increasingly tuned in to whether policies such as dress codes are enforced consistently. Racist treatment of customers or selective enforcement of workplace rules can create liability for employers even when minority employees are not the direct targets of every slight. Human-resources and legal commentators advise businesses to revisit enforcement practices and training with that in mind.
We will keep an eye on new filings in Ferrer v. Detroit Club Management Corp., including any post-trial motions, the formal entry of judgment and notices of appeal, and will update this report as additional documents or statements emerge.
