University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. U.S. INVESTIGATIONS SERVICES INC EE-PA-0171
Docket / Court 3:06-cv-00209-KRG-KAP ( W.D. Pa. )
State/Territory Pennsylvania
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
The EEOC brought this suit against U.S. Investigations Services, Inc. in September 2006 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (Johnstown). The complaint alleged sexual harassment, sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights ... read more >
The EEOC brought this suit against U.S. Investigations Services, Inc. in September 2006 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (Johnstown). The complaint alleged sexual harassment, sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The intervenor-plaintiffs alleged sexual harassment, sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act. Very little activity occurred before the case was settled by consent decree in November 2007. The intervenor-plaintiffs entered into separate settlement agreements and general releases with U.S. Investigation Services, the terms of which were incorporated into the consent decree. The case closed in February 2008 upon a stipulation of dismissal by the intervenor-plaintiffs and U.S. Investigations Services.

The three-year consent decree included non-discrimination and non-retaliation clauses and requires U.S. Investigations Services to mail notice of the consent decree to all of its former employees who were employed on June 15, 2007. It requires U.S. Investigations Services to draft and implement policies against discrimination, harassment and retaliation in violation of Title VII and a complaint procedure, including a toll-free number for reporting violations of the policies. The decree includes a "notice and chance to remedy" dispute resolution process and it automatically extends if any material disputes remain unresolved after the term of the decree. U.S. Investigations Services was required to pay a total of $360,000. Two intervenor-plaintiffs were each awarded $115,250, minus $46,248.30 for attorney's fees and costs. One intervenor-plaintiff was awarded $129,500, minus $51,930.02 for attorney's fees and costs.

Daisy Manning - 06/04/2008


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Content of Injunction
Develop anti-discrimination policy
Discrimination Prohibition
Implement complaint/dispute resolution process
Retaliation Prohibition
Discrimination-area
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Discrimination-basis
Sex discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
Private Party intervened in EEOC suit
General
Disparate Treatment
Retaliation
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
State Anti-Discrimination Law
Defendant(s) U.S. Investigations Services, 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 2007 - 2010
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)
3:06-cv-00209-KRG-KAP (W.D. Pa.) 02/11/2008
EE-PA-0171-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint and Jury Trial Demand 09/29/2006
EE-PA-0171-0001.pdf | Detail
Intervenors' Complaint 02/14/2007
EE-PA-0171-0002.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Consent Decree 11/29/2007
EE-PA-0171-0003.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 -