University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Ledesmav. Res-Care Oklahoma EE-OK-0051
Docket / Court 5:02-CV-01188 ( W.D. Okla. )
State/Territory Oklahoma
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Case Summary
Because part of this case predates PACER, we do not have access to all of the documents on the docket. Specifically, we lack the complaint. From what we know, four plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination brought suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma ... read more >
Because part of this case predates PACER, we do not have access to all of the documents on the docket. Specifically, we lack the complaint. From what we know, four plaintiffs alleging employment discrimination brought suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma against Res-Care Oklahoma on August 20, 2002. The case was assigned to Judge Joe Heaton.

On April 16, 2003, the court issued an order temporarily closing the case without prejudice, stating that the two parties had reached a settlement. Two months later, three of the plaintiffs moved to dismiss the cases, allegedly because they had come to an agreement with the defendant.

However, one plaintiff did not sign on to the motion to dismiss, and instead filed a “Motion for Determination to be held in Federal Court.” In an order issued on June 18, 2003, Judge Heaton stated that the import of her motion was “not altogether clear, other than indicating she does not agree to the settlement. The motion raises various questions she apparently seeks to have the Court address. However, it is not the Court’s role to construe the tentative settlement agreement or to resolve abstract questions of law which a party may have as to such a settlement.” The fourth plaintiff’s lawyer moved to withdraw as her attorney, citing disagreements. The court urged her to find new counsel quickly.

Apparently proceeding without counsel, the fourth plaintiff moved to appeal on July 8, 2003. Judge Heaton interpreted this motion as an inquiry into whether she could be forced to sign the settlement agreement. He held that she was under no obligation to enter into any particular settlement agreement. He set trial for September 2003 and again urged her to find counsel.

Before trial could begin, the fourth plaintiff and the defendant apparently reached a new private settlement agreement. Judge Heaton ordered a settlement conference for August 4 and dismissed the case with prejudice the following day.
The case is now closed.

Averyn Lee - 03/18/2019


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Defendant-type
Hospital/Health Department
Discrimination-area
Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Defendant(s) Res-Care Oklahoma
Plaintiff Description The plaintiff alleged employment discrimination
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief Unknown
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Private Settlement Agreement
Filing Year 2002
Case Closing Year 2003
Case Ongoing No
Docket(s)
5:02-CV-01188-HE (W.D. Okla.)
EE-OK-0051-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 08/04/2003
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
No documents currently in the collection
show all people docs
Judges Heaton, Joe L. (W.D. Okla.) show/hide docs
EE-OK-0051-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Cawthon, J. David (Oklahoma) show/hide docs
EE-OK-0051-9000
Pedersen, Karen (Oklahoma) show/hide docs
EE-OK-0051-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Barrett, Gayle (Oklahoma) show/hide docs
EE-OK-0051-9000
Childers, Adam W. (Oklahoma) show/hide docs
EE-OK-0051-9000
Saunders, Lynne F. (Oklahoma) show/hide docs
EE-OK-0051-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -