University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. LEXUS OF SERRAMONTE & SONIC AUTO EE-CA-0129
Docket / Court C 05 0962 EMC ( N.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In March 2005, the EEOC district office of San Francisco, California brought this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Lexus of Serramonte, a Lexus automotive dealership; Sonic Automotive, Inc., an internet automotive dealership; and First America ... read more >
In March 2005, the EEOC district office of San Francisco, California brought this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Lexus of Serramonte, a Lexus automotive dealership; Sonic Automotive, Inc., an internet automotive dealership; and First America Automotive. The complaint alleged that the defendants maintained sexually hostile work environments in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After a grant of partial summary judgment for the EEOC, the parties attended a settlement conference in September 2006. The next day a consent decree was issued and the case was dismissed.

The consent decree stated that the defendant must (1) pay two identified employee, class members equal shares of unknown amounts out of a total $375,000 award; (2) pay all other unidentified employee, class members portions of the remaining $375,000 award, the computation of which is quite elaborate and explained fully in the consent decree; (3) halt all sexual harassing behavior; (4) prevent any harassment or discrimination based on sex; (5) refrain from retaliating against employees who complain about or resist any sex based discrimination; (6) post notices of its anti-sex discrimination policies; (7) choose and Equal Employment Opportunity Consultant who will monitor the defendant's compliance with Title VII, review the defendants' anti-discrimination policies, and review the defendant's response to complaints; (8) provide neutral reference letters to all class members; (9) train all existing and new employees on the affects of sex discrimination; (10) and retain all records of training and employment for EEOC inspection.

Jason Chester - 05/31/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Content of Injunction
Auditing
Develop anti-discrimination policy
Discrimination Prohibition
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Monitoring
Neutral/Positive Reference
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Provide antidiscrimination training
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Retaliation Prohibition
Discrimination-area
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
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) First America Automotive
Lexus of Serramonte
Sonic Automotive, 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 Voluntary Dismissal
Order Duration 2006 - 2008
Case Closing Year 2006
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)
4:05-cv-00962-SBA (N.D. Cal.) 01/22/2007
EE-CA-0129-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 03/08/2005
EE-CA-0129-0001 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Quashing Subpoenas 03/22/2006 (237 F.R.D. 220) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0129-0003 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order 07/10/2006 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0129-0004 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Motion to Compel Production of Employee Lists 08/09/2006 (2006 WL 2329510) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0129-0005 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order 09/12/2006 (2006 WL 2619367) (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0129-0011 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Following Settlement 09/15/2006 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0129-0013 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Dismissing Action 09/19/2006 (N.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0129-0014 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Consent Decree 01/22/2007
EE-CA-0129-0017 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 -