Case: Cronas v. Willis Group Holdings Ltd.

1:06-cv-15295 | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York

Filed Date: Dec. 18, 2006

Closed Date: 2012

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On December 18, 2006, three female, officer-level, former employees filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all current and former female officers and officer equivalents employed by Willis Holdings Group, Ltd. since 1998. The suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Title VII, the Human Rights Laws of the State and City of New York, and the New York Administrative Code § 8-107 against Willis Holdings, Ltd. The plaintiffs, represented…

On December 18, 2006, three female, officer-level, former employees filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of all current and former female officers and officer equivalents employed by Willis Holdings Group, Ltd. since 1998. The suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, Title VII, the Human Rights Laws of the State and City of New York, and the New York Administrative Code § 8-107 against Willis Holdings, Ltd. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, asked the court for a permanent injunction prohibiting the company and its employees from engaging in discriminatory practices, back pay and other job benefits, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorneys' fees, claiming that the company had discriminated against them on the basis of sex. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that Willis Group knew about the existence of a glass ceiling but did nothing to remedy it, had a pattern of paying female employees substantially less than male employees doing similar work, refused to consider female candidates for promotions, steered more business toward male employees, required females to complete a higher volume of work than similarly situated males, scrutinized females more heavily than similarly situated males, and terminated female employees who brought attention to the discrimination.

On September 17, 2007, the Court (Judge Gerard E. Lynch) denied a motion to dismiss filed by the defendants, finding that the plaintiffs had not met the administrative requirements for maintaining a Title VII lawsuit or alternatively, that the plaintiffs' claims were subject to mandatory arbitration.

On July 3, 2008, the plaintiffs submitted an amended complaint containing additional individual allegations for two of the named plaintiffs, neither of whom stated any individual allegations in the initial complaint. The additional allegations reference discriminatory hiring practices, compensation, promotions, and treatment in the workplace.

On November 20, 2008, Judge Lynch granted the defendant's motion to compel arbitration for the individual claims of one of the named plaintiffs and dismissed those claims from the lawsuit, due to a prominent arbitration clause in her employment contract.

On October 18, 2011, Judge Lynch filed a preliminary approval order, certifying, for settlement purposes, a proposed class of women employed in Willis Group's New York office in officer or officer-equivalent positions between 2002 and 2007.

On December 19, 2011, Judge Lynch approved the consent decree. Willis Group agreed to conduct performance evaluations of all its employees based on observable behavior, set forth in writing the criteria on which compensation decisions are made, post vacancies so that all current employees may apply, investigate all discrimination claims made to Human Resources in a timely manner, and submit any changes in policy to a court-approved monitor. In addition, Willis Group agreed to pay $11,595,030.85 to members of the class. The amount included attorneys' fees.

Summary Authors

Katherine Reineck (2/1/2015)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5040024/parties/cronas-v-willis-group-holdings-ltd/


Judge(s)

Berman, Richard M. (New York)

Freeman, Debra Carol (New York)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Fink, Rosalind (New York)

Herbst, Robert L. (New York)

Attorney for Defendant

Brown, Jeremy Miller (New Jersey)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:06-cv-15295

1:01-cv-06558

Docket [PACER]

March 14, 2012

March 14, 2012

Docket
1

1:06-cv-15295

Complaint

Cronas v. Willis Group Holdings, Ltd. et al

Dec. 18, 2006

Dec. 18, 2006

Complaint
16

1:06-cv-15295

Opinion on Motion to Dismiss

Cronas v. Willis Group Holdings, Ltd. et al

Sept. 17, 2007

Sept. 17, 2007

Order/Opinion
30

1:06-cv-15295

First Amended Complaint

Cronas v. Willis Group Holdings, Ltd.

July 3, 2008

July 3, 2008

Complaint
41

1:06-cv-15295

Opinion on Motion to Enlarge Discovery

Cronas v. Willis Group Holdings, Ltd. et al

Oct. 8, 2008

Oct. 8, 2008

Order/Opinion
46

1:06-cv-15295

Opinion on Motion to Compel Arbitration

Cronas v. Willis Group Holding, Ltd. et al

Nov. 20, 2008

Nov. 20, 2008

Order/Opinion
131-1

1:06-cv-15295

Consent Decree

Cronas v. Willis Group Holdings, Ltd.

May 6, 2011

May 6, 2011

Order/Opinion
142

1:06-cv-15295

Preliminary Approval Order

Cronas v. Willis Group Holdings, Ltd. et al

Oct. 18, 2011

Oct. 18, 2011

Order/Opinion
153

1:06-cv-15295

Decision

Cronas v. Willis Group Holdings, Ltd. et al

Dec. 19, 2011

Dec. 19, 2011

Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5040024/cronas-v-willis-group-holdings-ltd/

Last updated Feb. 15, 2024, 3:01 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link

Summons Issued

Dec. 19, 2006

Dec. 19, 2006

PACER

Case Referred as Possibly Related/Similar

Dec. 19, 2006

Dec. 19, 2006

PACER
1

Complaint

Dec. 19, 2006

Dec. 19, 2006

RECAP

Case Accepted as Related

Dec. 27, 2006

Dec. 27, 2006

PACER

Case Designation

Dec. 27, 2006

Dec. 27, 2006

PACER

Mail Notice to Attorney(s)

Dec. 27, 2006

Dec. 27, 2006

PACER
2

Notice of Case Assignment/Reassignment

Dec. 27, 2006

Dec. 27, 2006

PACER
3

Summons Returned Executed

Jan. 18, 2007

Jan. 18, 2007

PACER
4

Motion to Dismiss

Feb. 6, 2007

Feb. 6, 2007

PACER
5

Declaration in Support of Motion

2 Exhibit A

View on PACER

3 Exhibit B

View on PACER

4 Exhibit C

View on PACER

Feb. 6, 2007

Feb. 6, 2007

PACER
6

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

2 Appendix 1

View on PACER

3 Appendix II

View on PACER

4 Appendix III

View on PACER

5 Appendix IV

View on PACER

6 Appendix V

View on PACER

Feb. 6, 2007

Feb. 6, 2007

PACER
7

Rule 7.1 Corporate Disclosure Statement

Feb. 6, 2007

Feb. 6, 2007

PACER
8

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

2 Appendix I

View on PACER

3 Appendix II

View on PACER

4 Appendix III

View on PACER

5 Appendix IV

View on PACER

6 Appendix V

View on PACER

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

PACER
9

Notice of Appearance

Feb. 7, 2007

Feb. 7, 2007

PACER
10

Affidavit of Service Other

Feb. 27, 2007

Feb. 27, 2007

PACER
11

Endorsed Letter

March 8, 2007

March 8, 2007

PACER
12

Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion

March 21, 2007

March 21, 2007

PACER
13

Affirmation in Opposition to Motion

March 21, 2007

March 21, 2007

PACER
14

Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

April 2, 2007

April 2, 2007

PACER
15

Order

Aug. 15, 2007

Aug. 15, 2007

PACER
16

OPINION AND ORDER #95201: Plaintiff Adrianne Cronas brings this employment discrimination class action against her former employer Willis Group Holdings, and its affiliated entities (collectively, "Willis"). Plaintiff alleges a pattern and practice of sex discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 et seq. ("Title VII"), and related state and city laws. Defendants move to dismiss plaintiffs Title VII claims, arguing that plaintiff has not satisfied the administrative requirements for maintaining a Title VII claim, or alternatively, that plaintiffs discrimination claims are subject to mandatory arbitration. Defendants motion will be denied. For the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion is denied. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Gerard E. Lynch on 9/17/2007) (jmi) Modified on 9/19/2007 (Martin, Leslie).

Sept. 17, 2007

Sept. 17, 2007

RECAP
17

Motion for Certificate of Appealability

Oct. 17, 2007

Oct. 17, 2007

PACER
18

Declaration in Support of Motion

2 Exhibit A

View on PACER

3 Exhibit B

View on PACER

4 Exhibit C

View on PACER

Oct. 17, 2007

Oct. 17, 2007

PACER
19

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

Oct. 17, 2007

Oct. 17, 2007

PACER
20

Order

Oct. 22, 2007

Oct. 22, 2007

PACER
21

Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion

Nov. 5, 2007

Nov. 5, 2007

PACER
22

Answer to Complaint

Nov. 6, 2007

Nov. 6, 2007

PACER
23

Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

Nov. 12, 2007

Nov. 12, 2007

PACER
24

Protective Order

Nov. 19, 2007

Nov. 19, 2007

PACER
25

Order on Motion for Certificate of Appealability

Dec. 28, 2007

Dec. 28, 2007

PACER
26

Order

Feb. 5, 2008

Feb. 5, 2008

PACER
27

Protective Order

March 5, 2008

March 5, 2008

PACER
28

Stipulation and Order

June 27, 2008

June 27, 2008

PACER
29

Order

July 3, 2008

July 3, 2008

PACER
30

Amended Complaint

2 Summons

View on PACER

July 3, 2008

July 3, 2008

PACER
31

Endorsed Letter

July 21, 2008

July 21, 2008

PACER
32

Motion to Compel Arbitration

Aug. 7, 2008

Aug. 7, 2008

PACER
33

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

Aug. 7, 2008

Aug. 7, 2008

PACER
34

Declaration in Support of Motion

2 Exhibit A

View on PACER

3 Exhibit B

View on PACER

Aug. 7, 2008

Aug. 7, 2008

PACER
35

Answer to Amended Complaint

Aug. 7, 2008

Aug. 7, 2008

PACER
36

Order

Aug. 20, 2008

Aug. 20, 2008

PACER
37

Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Motion

Sept. 15, 2008

Sept. 15, 2008

PACER
38

Affirmation in Opposition to Motion

2 Exhibit Exhibit A - Original Complaint

View on PACER

3 Exhibit Exhibit B - AAA Rules for Class Arbitrations

View on PACER

Sept. 15, 2008

Sept. 15, 2008

PACER
39

Affidavit in Opposition to Motion

Sept. 15, 2008

Sept. 15, 2008

PACER
40

Reply Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

Sept. 26, 2008

Sept. 26, 2008

PACER
41

OPINION AND ORDER #96631: For the reasons set forth in this order, plaintiffs request that discovery be enlarged to include documents relating to the compensation and promotions of officers and officer equivalents at Willis Group and all is subsidiar ies nationwide is denied. As discovery has not yet closed, plaintiffs may review their request at a later date should such as an application be appropriate based on newly discovered evidence. The clerk of the court is respectfully requested to docket the joint letter and accompanying exhibits attached to this order. (Signed by Judge Gerard E. Lynch on 10/8/08) (mme) Modified on 10/10/2008 (mro).

Oct. 8, 2008

Oct. 8, 2008

RECAP
42

Letter

Oct. 9, 2008

Oct. 9, 2008

PACER
43

Exhibit

Oct. 9, 2008

Oct. 9, 2008

PACER
44

Exhibit

Oct. 9, 2008

Oct. 9, 2008

PACER
45

Scheduling Order

Nov. 17, 2008

Nov. 17, 2008

PACER
46

OPINION AND ORDER #96787 for the reasons, stated, defendants' motion to compel arbitration of the claims of plaintiff Theresa Reardon, and to dismiss those claims from this lawsuit, is granted re: 32 MOTION to Compel Arbitration of Plaintiff T heresa Reardon's Claims, filed by Willis of North America, Inc., Willis Group Holdings, Ltd., Willis of Masachusetts, Willis of New York, Inc., Willis of New Jersey. (Signed by Judge Gerard E. Lynch on 11/20/08) (cd) Modified on 11/25/2008 (mro).

Nov. 21, 2008

Nov. 21, 2008

RECAP
47

Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge

March 31, 2009

March 31, 2009

PACER
48

Scheduling Order

March 31, 2009

March 31, 2009

PACER
49

Notice of Change of Address

June 4, 2009

June 4, 2009

PACER
50

Order

Aug. 31, 2009

Aug. 31, 2009

PACER
51

Notice of Case Assignment/Reassignment

Oct. 1, 2009

Oct. 1, 2009

PACER
52

Order

Oct. 6, 2009

Oct. 6, 2009

PACER
53

Endorsed Letter

Oct. 19, 2009

Oct. 19, 2009

PACER

Status Conference

Nov. 2, 2009

Nov. 2, 2009

PACER
54

Case Management Plan

Nov. 2, 2009

Nov. 2, 2009

PACER
55

Endorsed Letter

Nov. 6, 2009

Nov. 6, 2009

PACER
56

Order

Nov. 24, 2009

Nov. 24, 2009

PACER
57

Order Referring Case to Magistrate Judge

Dec. 24, 2009

Dec. 24, 2009

PACER
58

Protective Order

Dec. 28, 2009

Dec. 28, 2009

PACER
59

Endorsed Letter

Feb. 4, 2010

Feb. 4, 2010

PACER
60

Endorsed Letter

Feb. 16, 2010

Feb. 16, 2010

PACER
61

Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Feb. 18, 2010

Feb. 18, 2010

PACER

Discovery Hearing

Feb. 22, 2010

Feb. 22, 2010

PACER
62

Order on Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice

Feb. 23, 2010

Feb. 23, 2010

PACER

Cashiers Remark

Feb. 24, 2010

Feb. 24, 2010

PACER
63

Notice of Appearance

March 1, 2010

March 1, 2010

PACER
64

Order Admitting Attorney Pro Hac Vice

March 1, 2010

March 1, 2010

PACER

Status Conference

March 11, 2010

March 11, 2010

PACER

Set Deadlines/Hearings

March 11, 2010

March 11, 2010

PACER

Notice to Attorney to Re-File Document - Deficient Docket Entry Error

March 12, 2010

March 12, 2010

PACER
65

Motion to Compel

2 Affidavit of Jeremy M. Brown, Esq.

View on PACER

3 Exhibit A through E to Brown Declaration

View on PACER

4 Exhibit Exhibit F and G to Brown Declaration

View on PACER

5 Affidavit of Service

View on PACER

March 12, 2010

March 12, 2010

PACER
66

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

March 12, 2010

March 12, 2010

PACER
67

Motion to Compel

March 15, 2010

March 15, 2010

PACER
68

Declaration in Support of Motion

2 Exhibit A through E

View on PACER

3 Exhibit F through G

View on PACER

March 15, 2010

March 15, 2010

PACER
69

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

March 15, 2010

March 15, 2010

PACER
70

Affidavit of Service Other

March 15, 2010

March 15, 2010

PACER

Telephone Conference

March 29, 2010

March 29, 2010

PACER
71

Endorsed Letter

April 2, 2010

April 2, 2010

PACER
72

Endorsed Letter

April 13, 2010

April 13, 2010

PACER
73

Endorsed Letter

April 16, 2010

April 16, 2010

PACER
74

Letter

April 16, 2010

April 16, 2010

PACER

Transmission of Notice of Appeal to District Judge

May 14, 2010

May 14, 2010

PACER

Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Docket Sheet to USCA

May 14, 2010

May 14, 2010

PACER

Appeal Record Sent to USCA - Electronic File

May 14, 2010

May 14, 2010

PACER
75

Notice of Appeal

May 14, 2010

May 14, 2010

PACER
76

Order

May 19, 2010

May 19, 2010

PACER
77

Supplemental ROA Sent to USCA - Index

May 26, 2010

May 26, 2010

PACER
78

Endorsed Letter

June 17, 2010

June 17, 2010

PACER
79

Endorsed Letter

July 22, 2010

July 22, 2010

PACER
80

Endorsed Letter

Aug. 4, 2010

Aug. 4, 2010

PACER
81

Motion for Leave to File Document

Aug. 9, 2010

Aug. 9, 2010

PACER
82

Motion to Certify Class

Aug. 9, 2010

Aug. 9, 2010

PACER
83

Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion

Aug. 9, 2010

Aug. 9, 2010

PACER
84

Declaration in Support of Motion

1 Exhibit 1a

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 1b

View on PACER

3 Exhibit 2

View on PACER

4 Exhibit 3

View on PACER

5 Exhibit 4

View on PACER

6 Exhibit 5

View on PACER

7 Exhibit 6

View on PACER

8 Exhibit 7

View on PACER

9 Exhibit 8

View on PACER

10 Exhibit 9

View on PACER

11 Exhibit 10

View on PACER

12 Exhibit 11

View on PACER

13 Exhibit 12

View on PACER

14 Exhibit 13

View on PACER

15 Exhibit 14

View on PACER

16 Exhibit 15

View on PACER

17 Exhibit 16

View on PACER

18 Exhibit 17

View on PACER

19 Exhibit 18

View on PACER

20 Exhibit 19

View on PACER

21 Exhibit 20-49

View on PACER

22 Exhibit 50

View on PACER

23 Exhibit 51

View on PACER

24 Exhibit 52

View on PACER

Aug. 9, 2010

Aug. 9, 2010

PACER
85

Affidavit in Support of Motion

Aug. 9, 2010

Aug. 9, 2010

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: New York

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

Private Employment Class Actions

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Dec. 18, 2006

Closing Date: 2012

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Three women who were formerly employed in officer-level positions alleged discrimination based on sex.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Willis Group Holdings, Ltd. (New York), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1981

State law

Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Attorneys fees

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Amount Defendant Pays: $11,595,030.85

Order Duration: 2011 - 2014

Content of Injunction:

Promotion

Discrimination Prohibition

Retaliation Prohibition

Utilize objective hiring/promotion criteria

Follow recruitment, hiring, or promotion protocols

Provide antidiscrimination training

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Monitor/Master

Monitoring

Issues

General:

Retaliation

Discrimination-area:

Disparate Impact

Disparate Treatment

Hiring

Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)

Pay / Benefits

Promotion

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Sex or Gender:

Female