University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES EE-TN-0070
Docket / Court 3:04-cv-00882 ( M.D. Tenn. )
State/Territory Tennessee
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In September 2004, the Nashville Area Office of the EEOC brought this suit against Lucent Technologies, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. We do not have a copy of the complaint. However, according to a memorandum regarding the defendant's motion for summary ... read more >
In September 2004, the Nashville Area Office of the EEOC brought this suit against Lucent Technologies, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. We do not have a copy of the complaint. However, according to a memorandum regarding the defendant's motion for summary judgment, the complaint alleged that the defendant violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by discharging the charging party, an African American male, because of his race. After some discovery and scheduling orders, the parties took part in a couple settlement conferences in October 2005 in which a settlement could not be reached. In November 2005, the defendant filed a motion for summary judgment. This motion was granted in January 2006, terminating the case in the defendant's favor. The case was appealed in March 2006. In late October 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's ruling.

Michele Marxkors - 06/25/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Discrimination-area
Demotion
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Discrimination-basis
Race 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) Lucent Technologies, 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 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 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)
3:04-cv-00882 (M.D. Tenn.) 03/28/2006
EE-TN-0070-9000 PDF | Detail
General Documents
Memorandum [Regarding Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment] 01/20/2006 (2006 WL 156759) (M.D. Tenn.)
EE-TN-0070-0001 PDF | WESTLAW | Detail
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 -