University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Jane Doe v. District of Columbia EE-DC-0026
Docket / Court 02-2338 (RMU) ( D.D.C. )
State/Territory District of Columbia
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Attorney Organization U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Case Summary
On November 25, 2002, Jane Does I, II, and III filed lawsuits against the District of Columbia under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. and 42 U.S.C. § 1983e in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. On the same day, the cases were removed to the U.S. District Court for the District ... read more >
On November 25, 2002, Jane Does I, II, and III filed lawsuits against the District of Columbia under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. and 42 U.S.C. § 1983e in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. On the same day, the cases were removed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. On August 5, 2004, the United States filed an Intervenor Complaint in all three cases. The plaintiffs allege that the District of Columbia discriminated against the plaintiff and other females with respect to hiring into and employment in emergency medical response technician ("EMT") positions with the District of Columbia Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department ("FEMSD") because of their sex and deprived them of their constitutional right. The plaintiffs asked for injunctive, remedial and compensatory relief for the plaintiffs and other females similarly situated.

The complaint alleges that the District of Columbia discriminated on the basis of sex by: (1) subjecting the plaintiffs and other female applicants for EMT positions in the District of Columbia's FEMSD to a pre-hiring pregnancy test; (2) conditioning an offer of employment to plaintiffs and other female applicants upon a negative result of the test; (3) advising plaintiffs and other female EMT's that if during their probationary periods they were or became pregnant, they were at risk of losing their jobs; and (4) failing or refusing to take appropriate action to remedy the effects of the discrimination.

One of the individually named defendants filed a counterclaim for slander stating: (1) the court lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendant as a result of the plaintiffs' failure to properly serve the defendant; (2) none of the said injuries were caused be or contributed to by the defendant's conduct; (3) each plaintiff gave informed consent to and assumed risk of having an abortion; (4) each plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies; and (5) the plaintiffs' legal representatives are the proximate cause of any alleged emotional distress, physical harm and pain arising in connection with each plaintiff's abortion.

As a result of the above discrimination, women who became pregnant during their probationary periods felt compelled to, and did, terminate their pregnancies by abortions. They did this so as not to risk losing their jobs. The plaintiffs filed a timely charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") in which she alleged the District of Columbia discriminated against her on the basis of sex. On August 31, 2005, a settlement agreement was reached that set the following provisions: (1) any and all claims or counter-claims the District of Columbia or its current or former employees have against the plaintiffs shall be released; (2) the District of Columbia's implementation and adoption of nondiscriminatory policies; (3) and the District of Columbia shall provide training on the rights of pregnant employees and applicants. The District of Columbia also agreed to report back to the United States with any complaints for three years.

The case is closed.

Erin Forman - 10/24/2007


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Defendant-type
Fire
Discrimination-area
Hiring
Discrimination-basis
Pregnancy discrimination
Sex discrimination
Plaintiff Type
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
42 U.S.C. § 1983
Defendant(s) District of Columbia Fire
Plaintiff Description Jane Does I, II, III and United States of America
Indexed Lawyer Organizations U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
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 2005 - 2008
Case Closing Year 2008
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)
02-2340-RMU (D.D.C.) 11/25/2002
EE-DC-0026-9002 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
02-2338 (RMU) (D.D.C.) 03/10/2004
EE-DC-0026-9001 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
02-2338 (RMU) (D.D.C.) 10/06/2006
EE-DC-0026-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint in Intervention 02/25/2004
EE-DC-0026-0001 PDF | Detail
Complaint In Intervention 02/25/2004
EE-DC-0026-0004 PDF | Detail
Complaint In Intervention 02/25/2004
EE-DC-0026-0005 PDF | Detail
Consolidated Defenses, Answer and Counterclaim 03/09/2004
EE-DC-0026-0003 PDF | Detail
Settlement Agreement 08/31/2005
EE-DC-0026-0002 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Opinion 09/05/2006 (448 F.Supp.2d 137) (D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0026-0006 PDF | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Document Source: Google Scholar
Judges Urbina, Ricardo M. (D.D.C.)
EE-DC-0026-0002 | EE-DC-0026-9000 | EE-DC-0026-9001 | EE-DC-0026-9002
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Acosta, R. Alexander (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-0001 | EE-DC-0026-0004 | EE-DC-0026-0005
Boardman, Ellen O. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-9000
Gadzichowski, John M. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-0001 | EE-DC-0026-0004 | EE-DC-0026-0005 | EE-DC-0026-9000
Hammond, Kristofor J (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-9000
Johnson, Alicia Dyoni (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-9000
Loughlin, Ann L. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-0001 | EE-DC-0026-0004 | EE-DC-0026-0005 | EE-DC-0026-9000
Malone, Louis P. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-9000 | EE-DC-0026-9001 | EE-DC-0026-9002
Palmer, David J. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-0001 | EE-DC-0026-0004 | EE-DC-0026-0005
Woodard, Karen D. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Bianco, Richard (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-0003
Hall, Wendel (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-9000 | EE-DC-0026-9001 | EE-DC-0026-9002
Longmeyer, Jennifer L. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-9000 | EE-DC-0026-9001 | EE-DC-0026-9002
Strauss, Paul (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-0003
Vavruska, Ronald L. Jr. (District of Columbia)
EE-DC-0026-0003 | EE-DC-0026-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -