University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. AUTOZONE INC EE-AL-0006
Docket / Court 1:06-cv-00607-KD-C ( S.D. Ala. )
State/Territory Alabama
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In September 2006, the EEOC brought this suit against AutoZone, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, under title VII of 42 U.S.C § 2000e. In this case, it is alleged that Autozone discharged an employee who worked in a store because he opposed discriminatory ... read more >
In September 2006, the EEOC brought this suit against AutoZone, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, under title VII of 42 U.S.C § 2000e. In this case, it is alleged that Autozone discharged an employee who worked in a store because he opposed discriminatory conduct of his supervisor (store manager) on the basis of race and sex. The EEOC asked for (a) a permanent injunction enjoining AutoZone from engaging in retaliating or any other employment discrimination practice on the basis of race, sex or retaliation; (b) an order for AutoZone to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which provide equal employment opportunities; (c) an order for AutoZone to provide backpay and compensate to a discharged employee; and (d) punitive damages.

In 2003, the employee recognized that his supervisor's conduct and statements towards employees and customers were racially and sexually derogatory and harassing in nature. The employee suggested his supervisor refrain from such behavior, wrote a letter to AutoZone's district manager about the supervisor's behavior, and visited AutoZone's regional human resources manager to report harassment by the supervisor. Autozone did not take any action about the reported behavior. The employee was then discharged by AutoZone in 2004.

On October 30, 2007, the District Court (Judge Kristi DuBose) granted AutoZone's motion for summary judgment stating that (1) AutoZone's discharge of him did not constitute retaliation against him after the involvement of EEOC; and (2) the supervisor's actions did not rise to the standard of racial harassment and sexual harassment, which are requirement of protection under title VII. The District Court entered judgment for AutoZone and dismissed the EEOC's claim with prejudice .

Kowa Takata - 10/15/2014


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Male
Defendant-type
Retailer
Discrimination-area
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
Discrimination-basis
Race discrimination
Sex discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
General
Retaliation
National Origin/Ethnicity
Other
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Race
Black
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
Defendant(s) AUTOZONE, INC
Plaintiff Description The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations EEOC
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Defendant
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief None
Source of Relief None
Form of Settlement None on record
Order Duration not on record
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)
1:06-cv-00607-KD-C (S.D. Ala.) 10/30/2007
EE-AL-0006-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 09/29/2006
EE-AL-0006-0001 PDF | Detail
Judgment 10/30/2007 (S.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0006-0002 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order 10/30/2007 (S.D. Ala.)
EE-AL-0006-0004 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges DuBose, Kristi (S.D. Ala.) [Magistrate]
EE-AL-0006-0002 | EE-AL-0006-0004 | EE-AL-0006-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Barrett, Mason D. (Alabama)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Bean, Julie Steptoe (Alabama)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Cooper, Ronald S. (District of Columbia)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Crook, Debra Hawes (Alabama)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Lee, James L. (District of Columbia)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Powe, Valerie Hicks (Alabama)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Reams, Gwendolyn Young (District of Columbia)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Russell, Ermea Jackson (Mississippi)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Smith, C. Emanuel (Alabama)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Roberts, Stuart D. (Alabama)
EE-AL-0006-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -