University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. CACTUS-LANCASTER, LLC EE-PA-0034
Docket / Court 04-4584 ( E.D. Pa. )
State/Territory Pennsylvania
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In September 2004 the Philadelphia District Office of the EEOC brought this lawsuit against restaurant service provider Cactus-Lancaster, LLC and Mr. Brett R. Austin, doing business as Cactus Willie's Steak Buffet, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania alleging ... read more >
In September 2004 the Philadelphia District Office of the EEOC brought this lawsuit against restaurant service provider Cactus-Lancaster, LLC and Mr. Brett R. Austin, doing business as Cactus Willie's Steak Buffet, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania alleging discrimination on the basis of gender, female, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Specifically, the complaint alleged that the defendant subjected the two charging parties, female employees, and a class of similarly situated persons to a sexually hostile work environment and retaliation for opposition of this activity. After one scheduling conference and a settlement conference before the District Judge, the parties settled the dispute in September 2005 through a consent decree.

The consent decree required the defendant to: refrain from participating in discrimination or retaliation, to develop an anti-discrimination policy, to distribute this policy to empoyees, to provide anti-discrimination training, and to provide a Toll-Free number for employees to lodge complaints. Additionally, the defendant was required to pay $100,000, to be distributed among 6 claimants.

Keri Livingston - 10/01/2007


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
Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law
Provide antidiscrimination training
Recordkeeping
Reporting
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
General
Disparate Treatment
Pattern or Practice
Retaliation
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
Defendant(s) Brett R. Austin (individual)
Cactus-Lancaster, LLC
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 2005 - 2008
Case Closing Year 2005
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)
2:04-cv-04584-JS (E.D. Pa.) 09/13/2005
EE-PA-0034-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
First Amended Complaint 11/16/2004
EE-PA-0034-0001 PDF | Detail
Order [Dismissing Action] 06/27/2005 (E.D. Pa.)
EE-PA-0034-0002 PDF | Detail
Consent Decree 09/13/2005
EE-PA-0034-0003 PDF | Detail
Document Source: District Court
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 -