On April 22, 1999, a black employee of an automotive plant sued the owner and its manager in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, Judge Edward W. Nottingham, for failing to prevent racial discrimination by other workers, in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and state law ...
read more >
On April 22, 1999, a black employee of an automotive plant sued the owner and its manager in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado, Judge Edward W. Nottingham, for failing to prevent racial discrimination by other workers, in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and state law.
Specifically, Plaintiff claimed he was the only black employee among 65 employees at the factory. Other employees shunned him, referred to him with the n-word and intimidated him in various ways. When the plaintiff found a black doll with a noose around it in his locker, he quit his position out of fear. He claimed that supervisors, were aware of discrimination and in fact witnessed it yet did not discipline the other employees. He claimed discrimination, ethnic intimidation, and constructive discharge in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. (against the company only); 42 U.S.C. § 1981; Colorado Revised Statutes §§ 18-2-121(2) and 13-21-106.5; and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress against 10 "Doe" defendants. The plaintiff sought a declaratory judgment, back pay, front pay, benefits, compensatory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys' fees and costs.
On December 1, 1999, the court granted a stipulated motion to dismiss with prejudice the supervisor defendant from the case. On June 29, 2000, the court dispensed with both parties' motions for summary judgment.
Goodman v. Timpte, 2000 WL 34507333, No. 99-795 (D. Colo. Jun. 29, 2000). The Court granted the defendants' motion in part as to the plaintiff's third claim for ethnic intimidation. It denied the motion in all other respects. The court also denied the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment and dismissed his claims against the unidentified plaintiffs and the fourth claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
On October 30, 2000, the court dismissed the case with prejudice, after a stipulated motion. It appears the parties reached a settlement, although an agreement is not publicly available. This is the last entry on the docket.
Eric Weiler - 07/01/2010
compress summary
