University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES EE-MN-0043
Docket / Court 0:04-cv-04170-JNE-SRN ( D. Minn. )
State/Territory Minnesota
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
IWPR/Wage Project Consent Decree Study
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
The Milwaukee office of the EEOC brought this action in the District of Minnesota, against Lubrication Technologies, Inc. The complaint, filed in September 2004, alleged sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; specifically that the Defendant had failed to ... read more >
The Milwaukee office of the EEOC brought this action in the District of Minnesota, against Lubrication Technologies, Inc. The complaint, filed in September 2004, alleged sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; specifically that the Defendant had failed to promote the charging party because of her sex, female. The EEOC moved for partial summary judgment in February 2005 but withdrew the motion in March 2005.

The parties entered into a consent decree in July 2005. The decree, valid for 2 years, provided for the Defendant to pay the charging party a total of $80,000 ($50,000 in back pay and $30,000 in compensatory damages). The decree also required the Defendant to comply with the non-discrimination and non-retaliation provisions of Title VII, provide annual EEO training to its managers and administrators, create a new anti-discrimination policy, post a notice of non-discrimination at its facility, document and maintain records related to every complaint of sex discrimination in hiring and/or promotion, maintain an applicant flow log, provide the EEOC with annual EEO-1 reports and advertise in at least one media outlet that targets women.

Shankar Viswanathan - 06/25/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Content of Injunction
Comply with advertising/recruiting requirements
Develop anti-discrimination policy
Discrimination Prohibition
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Provide antidiscrimination training
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Retaliation Prohibition
Discrimination-area
Promotion
Discrimination-basis
Sex discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
General
Disparate Treatment
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
Defendant(s) Lubrication Technologies, 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 2005 - 2007
Case Closing Year 2005
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)
0:04-cv-04170-JNE-SRN (D. Minn.) 07/13/2005
EE-MN-0043-9001.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 09/22/2004
EE-MN-0043-0001.pdf | Detail
Consent Decree 07/13/2005
EE-MN-0043-0002.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 -