University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. J. A. SUTHERLAND, INC. (d/b/a TACO BELL) EE-CA-0111
Docket / Court 3:06-cv-04705-TEH ( N.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
IWPR/Wage Project Consent Decree Study
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In August 2006, the San Francisco District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against restaurant services provider J.A. Sutherland, Inc., doing business as Taco Bell, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California alleging discrimination on the basis of gender, female, in ... read more >
In August 2006, the San Francisco District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against restaurant services provider J.A. Sutherland, Inc., doing business as Taco Bell, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California alleging discrimination on the basis of gender, female, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, the complaint alleged that the defendant subjected the complaining party to a sexually hostile environment. The complaining party intervened in the lawsuit in July 2007. Following some discovery, the parties settled the lawsuit in July 2007 though a consent decree.

The two-year decree, containing an anti-discrimination clause, required the defendant to: report complaints and make compliance reports, expunge the complainant's employment record and provide a neutral reference, rewrite its anti-discrimination policy, distribute employee rights, implement a complaint resolution process, provide EEO training, require supervisors/managers to actively monitor to prevent harassment and discipline them for failure to do so, and pay $48,000 to the complaining party.

David Friedman - 04/29/2008


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Content of Injunction
Discrimination Prohibition
Expungement of Employment Record
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Neutral/Positive Reference
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Provide antidiscrimination training
Reporting
Discrimination-area
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
Discrimination-basis
Sex discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
Private Party intervened in EEOC suit
General
Disparate Treatment
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
State Anti-Discrimination Law
Defendant(s) J.A. Sutherland, Inc.
Plaintiff Description Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations EEOC
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 2007 - 2009
Case Closing Year 2007
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
click to show/hide detail
Case Studies Megacases, Diversity, and the Elusive Goal of Workplace Reform
Written: Mar. 01, 2008
By: Nancy Levit (University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law)
Citation: 49 B.C. L. Rev. 367 (2008)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Second Generation Employment Discrimination: A Structural Approach
By: Susan Sturm (Columbia Law School)
Citation: 101 Colum. L. Rev. 458 (2001)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
3:06-cv-04705-TEH (N.D. Cal.) 07/19/2007
EE-CA-0111-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 08/03/2006
EE-CA-0111-0003 PDF | Detail
First Amended Complaint 10/30/2006
EE-CA-0111-0001 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Complaint in Intervention 11/14/2006
EE-CA-0111-0002 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Consent Decree 07/19/2007
EE-CA-0111-0004 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges None on record
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers None on record
Defendant's Lawyers None on record
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -