University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. CENTRAL ENO CORPORATION et al EE-CA-0069
Docket / Court 2:02-cv-07487-SJO-E ( C.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In September 2002, the EEOC district office in Los Angeles, California brought this suit against the Central ENO Corporation, doing business as ENO California V Generation Corporation, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint is currently unavailable. The ... read more >
In September 2002, the EEOC district office in Los Angeles, California brought this suit against the Central ENO Corporation, doing business as ENO California V Generation Corporation, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint is currently unavailable. The consent decree states that a former employee, a Hispanic male, alleged national origin discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, he claimed that the defendant denied him and other Hispanic employees equal working conditions and equal pay compared to similarly situated Korean employees. The former employee also claimed that the defendant terminated him when he complained about the discrimination. The case was quickly disposed of and a consent decree was entered in September 2003.

In the consent decree, the parties agreed that the defendant would pay the former employee $20,000 in compensatory damages only, refrain from discriminating on the basis of national origin, provide EEO training to its supervisory staff, keep a compensation log, post and distribute EEO notices, and submit semiannual reports to the EEOC. No fees or costs were awarded. The terms of the agreement ran for thirty months.

Joel Pettit - 06/16/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Content of Injunction
Discrimination Prohibition
Monitoring
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Provide antidiscrimination training
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Discrimination-area
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Pay / Benefits
Discrimination-basis
National origin discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
General
Disparate Treatment
Retaliation
National Origin/Ethnicity
Indian
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
Defendant(s) The Central ENO Corporation
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 2003 - 2006
Case Closing Year 2003
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)
2:02-cv-07487-SJO-E (C.D. Cal.) 09/11/2003
EE-CA-0069-9000.pdf | Detail
General Documents
Consent Decree 09/11/2003
EE-CA-0069-0001.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 -