University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. County of Maui Police Department EE-HI-0022
Docket / Court 13-cv-00698-LEK-KSC ( D. Haw. )
State/Territory Hawaii
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In December 2013, the EEOC brought this suit against the County of Maui Police Department in the U.S. District Court of Hawaii, under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). In this case, it is alleged that the County of Maui Police Department did not hire a candidate because of ... read more >
In December 2013, the EEOC brought this suit against the County of Maui Police Department in the U.S. District Court of Hawaii, under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). In this case, it is alleged that the County of Maui Police Department did not hire a candidate because of his age (45). The EEOC asked for (a) a permanent injunction enjoining the police from engaging in any employment practices which results in discrimination on the basis of age; (b) an order that the police institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for persons forty (40) years of age and older; (c) an order that the police provide wages and benefits to the candidate; and (d) an order that the police provide rightful-place reinstatement with seniority restored or front pay.

In 2009, the candidate applied to the County of Maui Police Department. He met all minimum qualifications for training and experience, and he passed the initial written civil service exam with a high score above 90 points. Then he was scheduled for an oral interview. During the interview, the panel made age-based remarks including "I doubt someone your age could handle the stress of training" in addition to whether he could perform the physical holds required due to his age, and whether someone his age could take directives from a younger person. They decided not to hire the candidate. During the hiring period of January through October 2009, at least 28 applicants were hired who were younger than the candidate and were less qualified for the position than the candidate on the basis of their education, experience and civil service written exam scores.

On May 6, 2016, the parties entered into a three year consent decree that required the defendant to pay the charging party $24,000 in unclassified damages and required the defendant to modify its anti discrimination policy, establish record-keeping procedures, improve its compliance efforts, provide anti-discrimination training to employees to prevent future discrimination including providing training to employees, and report to an independent monitor.

Kowa Takata - 10/28/2014
Sean Mulloy - 03/21/2018


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Male
Content of Injunction
Develop anti-discrimination policy
Monitor/Master
Monitoring
Provide antidiscrimination training
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Training
Defendant-type
Law-enforcement
Discrimination-area
Hiring
Discrimination-basis
Age discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
General
Disparate Treatment
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq.
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219
Defendant(s) County of Maui Police Department
Plaintiff Description The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
Indexed Lawyer Organizations EEOC
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Filed Pro Se No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 2016 - 2019
Filing Year 2013
Case Ongoing Yes
Docket(s)
1:13−cv−00698 (D. Haw.)
EE-HI-0022-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 05/09/2016
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
EEOC Sues Maui County Police Department for Age Discrimination
EE-HI-0022-0002.pdf | External Link | Detail
Date: 12/18/2013
Source: EEOC.gov
Complaint [ECF# 1]
EE-HI-0022-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 12/18/2013
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Consent Decree; Order [ECF# 43] (D. Haw.)
EE-HI-0022-0003.pdf | Detail
Date: 05/09/2016
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Chang, Kevin S.C. (D. Haw.)
EE-HI-0022-0003 | EE-HI-0022-9000
Plaintiff's Lawyers Liem, Connie (California)
EE-HI-0022-9000
Mallik, Amrita (Hawaii)
EE-HI-0022-0001 | EE-HI-0022-9000
Noh, Sue J. (California)
EE-HI-0022-9000
Park, Anna Y. (California)
EE-HI-0022-0001 | EE-HI-0022-0002 | EE-HI-0022-9000
Vuong, Rumduol (California)
EE-HI-0022-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Kolbe, Thomas W. (Hawaii)
EE-HI-0022-9000
Lutey, Moana Monique (Hawaii)
EE-HI-0022-9000
Rost, Richard B. (Hawaii)
EE-HI-0022-9000

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -