Case: EEOC v. DMS DIRECT MARKETING SERVICES INC

2:99-cv-01766 | U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

Filed Date: Sept. 30, 1999

Closed Date: May 5, 2000

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In September 1999, the Phoenix District Office of the EEOC brought this suit against DMS Direct Marketing Services, Inc., aka Direct Marketing Services, Inc., and related businesses in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. We do not have a copy of the complaint; however, it appears from an EEOC press release that the complaint alleged that the defendant discriminated against eleven individuals on the basis of race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Speci…

In September 1999, the Phoenix District Office of the EEOC brought this suit against DMS Direct Marketing Services, Inc., aka Direct Marketing Services, Inc., and related businesses in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. We do not have a copy of the complaint; however, it appears from an EEOC press release that the complaint alleged that the defendant discriminated against eleven individuals on the basis of race in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, the defendant subjected the individuals to racial harassment, paid them unequal wages, and denied them promotions because of their race, Black. Six charging parties intervened in the suit in November 1999. After some discovery, the parties settled in May 2000 through a consent decree.

The consent decree contained non-discrimination and non-retaliation clauses and required the defendant to: provide Title VII training for all its employees, maintain all relevant documents, post an anti-discrimination notice, evaluate supervisory and human resource personnel on their response to complaints of discrimination, and pay $700,000. Additionally the defendant was required to apologize to each charging party and expunge their employment records.

Summary Authors

Keri Livingston (7/30/2007)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:99-cv-01766

Docket (PACER)

EEOC v. Direct Marketing Services, Inc.

May 5, 2000

May 5, 2000

Docket
1

2:99-cv-01766

Complaint

EEOC v. Direct Marketing Services

Sept. 30, 1999

Sept. 30, 1999

Complaint
10

2:99-cv-01766

Intervenors Complaint

EEOC v. Direct Marketing Services

Nov. 26, 1999

Nov. 26, 1999

Complaint

2:99-cv-01766

EEOC Press Release

EEOC v. Direct Marketing Services

No Court

May 5, 2000

May 5, 2000

Press Release
21

2:99-cv-01766

Consent Decree

EEOC v. DMS Direct Marketing Services

May 5, 2000

May 5, 2000

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated March 18, 2024, 3:01 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT FILED (SAT) (Entered: 10/04/1999)

Sept. 30, 1999

Sept. 30, 1999

2

RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED of summons/complaint upon dft CSG Inc on 10/25/99 (former emp) (Entered: 10/26/1999)

Oct. 26, 1999

Oct. 26, 1999

3

RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED of summons/complaint upon dft ACMR Enterprises Inc on 10/21/99 (former emp) (Entered: 10/28/1999)

Oct. 27, 1999

Oct. 27, 1999

4

RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED of summons/complaint upon dft Direct Marketing Svc on 10/27/99 (former emp) (Entered: 10/28/1999)

Oct. 28, 1999

Oct. 28, 1999

5

MOTION to intervene as plas by Regina Battle, Audria Clayton, Kathy Denman, Denise Hamilton, Jason Hughes, Tevis Mack [5-1] (former emp) (Entered: 11/05/1999)

Nov. 4, 1999

Nov. 4, 1999

6

ORDER by Judge Stephen M. McNamee granting motion to intervene as plas by Regina Battle, Audria Clayton, Kathy Denman, Denise Hamilton, Jason Hughes, Tevis Mack [5-1] (cc: all counsel) (DMT) (Entered: 11/08/1999)

Nov. 8, 1999

Nov. 8, 1999

7

STIPULATION for extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to complaint by pla EEOC, dfts ACMR Enterprises Inc, Universal Telesvc AZ, and Direct Marketing Svc [7-1] (former emp) (Entered: 11/17/1999)

Nov. 15, 1999

Nov. 15, 1999

8

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by pla EEOC; jury demand [1-1] (Direct Marketing Services, t/n DMS Direct Marketing Services Inc) (former emp) (Entered: 11/18/1999)

Nov. 17, 1999

Nov. 17, 1999

9

ORDER by Judge Stephen M. McNamee granting stipulation for extension of time to answer or otherwise respond to complaint by pla EEOC, dfts ACMR Enterprises Inc, Universal Telesvc AZ, and Direct Marketing Svc [7-1] to 12/16/99 to answer complaint [1-1] (cc: all counsel) (former emp) (Entered: 11/24/1999)

Nov. 24, 1999

Nov. 24, 1999

10

COMPLAINT FILED; jury demand by Applicants/Intervenors Regina Battle, Audria Clayton, Kathy Denman, Denise Hamilton, Jason Hughes, Tevis Mack (former emp) (Entered: 11/26/1999)

Nov. 26, 1999

Nov. 26, 1999

11

MOTION to quash subpoena (issued to CSG, Inc) by pla [11-1] (former emp) (Entered: 12/10/1999)

Dec. 9, 1999

Dec. 9, 1999

12

ORDER by Judge Stephen M. McNamee granting motion to quash subpoena (issued to CSG, Inc) by pla [11-1] (cc: all counsel) (former emp) (Entered: 12/13/1999)

Dec. 13, 1999

Dec. 13, 1999

13

Notice of ERRATA by pla to motion to quash [11-1] (former emp) (Entered: 12/15/1999)

Dec. 13, 1999

Dec. 13, 1999

14

AMENDED ORDER by Judge Stephen M. McNamee re: order [12-1], re: motion to quash subpoena (issued to CSG, Inc) by pla [11-1]; ORDERED quashing summons (cc: all counsel) (Note: motion inadvertently states "subpoena" but it is a summons) (former emp) (Entered: 12/15/1999)

Dec. 15, 1999

Dec. 15, 1999

15

Application/Consent (MOTION) to substitute counsel (Tod F Schleier in place of Teresa D Forst & L Eric Dowell of Bryan Cave) by dft Universal Telesvc AZ [15-1] (former emp) (Entered: 12/18/1999)

Dec. 16, 1999

Dec. 16, 1999

16

ANSWER to 1st amended complaint by DMS Direct Marketing, ACMR Enterprises Inc, Universal Telesvc AZ (former emp) (Entered: 12/18/1999)

Dec. 16, 1999

Dec. 16, 1999

17

ORDER by Judge Stephen M. McNamee granting motion to substitute counsel (Tod F Schleier in place of Teresa D Forst & L Eric Dowell of Bryan Cave) by dft Universal Telesvc AZ [15-1] (terming attorneys Leigh Eric Dowell, Teresa D Forst for Universal Telesvc and substituting attorneys Tod F Schleier, James M Jellison) (cc: all counsel) (former emp) (Entered: 12/20/1999)

Dec. 20, 1999

Dec. 20, 1999

18

Standard Civil Track Initial Order by Judge Stephen M. McNamee (cc: all counsel) re: order [18-1] (former emp) (Entered: 01/05/2000)

Jan. 5, 2000

Jan. 5, 2000

19

NOTICE by pla EEOC re: ptys are ready for the setting preliminary scheduling conference. (former emp) (Entered: 01/13/2000)

Jan. 12, 2000

Jan. 12, 2000

20

ORDER by Judge Stephen M. McNamee ; prel scheduling conf set for 4:00 5/22/00 (cc: all counsel) (former emp) (Entered: 01/24/2000)

Jan. 24, 2000

Jan. 24, 2000

21

CONSENT JUDGMENT: by Judge Stephen M. McNamee This decree resolves all claims of the Commission, those it represents and all putative class members against dfts, including back pay, compensatory and punitive damages, interest, injunctive relief, and attorney's fees and costs arising out of the issues in this lawsuit; Judgment is entered in favor of the Commission and against dfts in the amount of $700,000. terminating case (cc: all counsel) (former emp) (Entered: 05/05/2000)

May 5, 2000

May 5, 2000

Case Details

State / Territory: Arizona

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 30, 1999

Closing Date: May 5, 2000

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

EEOC Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

CSG Inc., Private Entity/Person

Universal Teleservices Arizona Corporation, Private Entity/Person

Universal Teleservices Network Corporation, Private Entity/Person

ACMR Enterprises, Inc., Private Entity/Person

DMS Direct Marketing Services, Inc., Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Amount Defendant Pays: 700000

Order Duration: 2000 - 2002

Content of Injunction:

Apology

Expungement of Employment Record

Discrimination Prohibition

Retaliation Prohibition

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Provide antidiscrimination training

Reporting

Recordkeeping

Monitoring

Issues

General:

Retaliation

Discrimination-area:

Disparate Treatment

Demotion

Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff

Harassment / Hostile Work Environment

Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)

Pay / Benefits

Promotion

Discrimination-basis:

National origin discrimination

Pregnancy discrimination

Race discrimination

Sex discrimination

Race:

Black

Affected Sex or Gender:

Female

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits

Private Party intervened in EEOC suit

National Origin/Ethnicity:

Indian