University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. REGAL ENTERTAINMENT GROUP EE-CA-0182
Docket / Court 2:06-cv-04145 ( C.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In this case the EEOC charged that a male employee at a Regal theater in Marina del Rey, Calif., a section of Los Angeles, was subjected to a sexually hostile workplace by a female co-worker who repeatedly grabbed his crotch. When the male victim and his direct supervisor complained to the theater� ... read more >
In this case the EEOC charged that a male employee at a Regal theater in Marina del Rey, Calif., a section of Los Angeles, was subjected to a sexually hostile workplace by a female co-worker who repeatedly grabbed his crotch. When the male victim and his direct supervisor complained to the theater’s then-general manager, she failed to take adequate steps to stop or prevent the harassment. Instead, the EEOC said, she retaliated against the harassed employee and two other supervisory employees (male and female), who are part of the EEOC’s suit. The retaliation included unwarranted discipline, unfairly lower performance evaluations and/or stricter scrutiny of performance.

Sexual harassment and retaliation for complaining about it violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC filed suit against Regal in 2006 in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement.

According to EEOC data, the percentage of men filing sexual harassment charges with the federal agency and state/local government agencies nationwide has increased over the past decade from 12 to 16 percent of all charges involving sexual harassment.

The case settled in November 2009. Regal Entertainment Group agreed to pay $175,000. In addition to the monetary relief, the consent decree settling the case required Regal Entertainment Group to: provide annual anti-discrimination training to its employees; closely track any future discrimination complaints to conform to its obligations under Title VII; and provide annual reports to the EEOC regarding its employment practices.

Erin Pamukcu - 02/07/2016


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
No EEOC Final Resolution Type
General
Disparate Treatment
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
Defendant(s) Does 1-10
Regal Cinemas Corporation
Regal Cinemas, Inc.
Regal Entertainment Group Inc.
Regal Entertainment Holdings Inc.
United Artists Theatre Circuit Inc.
United Artists Theatre Company
Plaintiff Description Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of male employee sexually harassed at work.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations EEOC
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Mixed
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration not on record
Case Closing Year 2009
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)
2:06-cv-04145-ABC-CW (C.D. Cal.) 11/10/2009
EE-CA-0182-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Joint Stipulation Re: Dismissal of the Civil Action and Request for Court to Retain Jurisdiction for Two Years From November 3, 2009 11/09/2009
EE-CA-0182-0002 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Re: Joint Stipulation Re: Dismissal of the Civil Action and Request for Court to Retain Jurisdiction for Two Years From November 11/10/2009 (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0182-0001 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Collins, Audrey B. (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0182-0001 | EE-CA-0182-9000
Woehrle, Carla M. (C.D. Cal.) [Magistrate]
EE-CA-0182-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Noh, Sue J. (California)
EE-CA-0182-0002 | EE-CA-0182-9000
Park, Anna Y. (California)
EE-CA-0182-0002 | EE-CA-0182-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Espinosa, Stephanie Henderson (California)
EE-CA-0182-9000
Kohler, Christine A (California)
EE-CA-0182-9000
Lindsay, Michael R (California)
EE-CA-0182-0002 | EE-CA-0182-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -