University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. AT&T, CWA & LOCAL 4354 EE-OH-0004
Docket / Court C2 97-167 ( S.D. Ohio )
State/Territory Ohio
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In February 1997, the Cleveland, Ohio office of the EEOC brought this suit against AT&T Corp., as well as against the Communication Workers of America and Local 4354 Communication Workers of America, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Although the complaint is ... read more >
In February 1997, the Cleveland, Ohio office of the EEOC brought this suit against AT&T Corp., as well as against the Communication Workers of America and Local 4354 Communication Workers of America, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Although the complaint is unavailable, an opinion from the case states that the EEOC alleged violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).

In September 1997, defendant AT&T Corp. filed a motion to dismiss based upon statute of limitations, which was ultimately denied, EEOC v. AT&T Co., 36 F. Supp. 2d 994 (S.D. Ohio 1998). Both plaintiff EEOC and defendants filed motions for summary judgment. The defendant's motions for summary judgment were granted in September 1998, while the EEOC's motion was denied. The case was thereafter dismissed, and the EEOC filed a notice of appeal. In March 2000, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision.

Kevin Wilemon - 09/28/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Discrimination-basis
Age discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
General
Disparate Treatment
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. ยงยง 621 et seq.
Defendant(s) AT&T Corp.
Communications Workers of America
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 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 1998
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)
98-4367 (U.S. Court of Appeals) 01/06/1999
EE-OH-0004-9001 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
98-4348 (U.S. Court of Appeals) 02/01/2001
EE-OH-0004-9002 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
2:97-cv-00167-EAS-NMK (S.D. Ohio) 07/15/2003
EE-OH-0004-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Opinion and Order 07/17/1998 (36 F.Supp.2d 994) (S.D. Ohio)
EE-OH-0004-0001 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
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 -