University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
HOME ABOUT FOR TEACHERS SEARCH QUESTIONS RECENT ADDITIONS feedback/
suggestions 		log in/
register
Case Profile
 new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. SHELTON HO (d/b/a QUIZNO'S SUBS) et al EE-CA-0176
Docket / Court 2:06-cv-00215-DSF-JC ( C.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
EEOC's Los Angeles, CA office filed this lawsuit against two individual defendants in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Western Division ñ Los Angeles) on 01/12/2006. The two individual defendants were sole proprietors of a Quizno's restaurant. EEOC also ... read more >
EEOC's Los Angeles, CA office filed this lawsuit against two individual defendants in the United States District Court for the Central District of California (Western Division ñ Los Angeles) on 01/12/2006. The two individual defendants were sole proprietors of a Quizno's restaurant. EEOC also listed DOES 1-10 as unidentified defendants. The individual complainants did not intervene in the lawsuit. The parties were referred to ADR (Attorney Settlement Officer Panel) but did not reach an agreement. Thereafter, the case was assigned to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Chooljian for settlement. After two settlement conferences, the parties proposed a settlement agreement on 09/22/2006 and the case was administratively dismissed on 09/26/2006. With only the docket and a 2-page dismissal order, we do not know what the specific allegations were.

Justin Kanter - 06/16/2007

compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
 click to show/hide detail
Issues
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
General
Disparate Treatment
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
Case Details
 click to show/hide detail
Defendant(s) DOES 1-10 inclusive
Eva Yu-Hwa Ho
Shelton Ho
Plaintiff Description Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.
Indexed Lawyer Organizations EEOC
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Unknown
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Voluntary Dismissal
Case Closing Year 2006
Case Ongoing No
Additional Resources
 click to show/hide detail
  Microsoft Gender Discrimination Class Action Lawsuit
Date: Oct. 14, 2016
By: Outten & Golden
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Age Discrimination Class Action seeks Fair Employment for Older PwC Applicants
http://www.pwcagecase.com/
Date: Apr. 27, 2016
By: Outten & Golden
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Smith Barney Gender Discrimination
https://www.lieffcabraser.com/employment/smith-barney/
Date: August 2008
By: Outten & Golden
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Megacases, Diversity, and the Elusive Goal of Workplace Reform
Date: Mar. 1, 2008
By: Nancy Levit (University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law Faculty)
Citation: 49 B.C. L. Rev. 367 (2008)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

  Second Generation Employment Discrimination: A Structural Approach
Date: Apr. 1, 2001
By: Susan Sturm (Columbia Law School Faculty)
Citation: 101 Colum. L. Rev. 458 (2001)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Documents
 click to show/hide detail
Docket(s)
2:06-cv-00215-DSF-JC (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0176-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/26/2006
General Documents
Order Dismissing the Action with Prejudice [ECF# 42] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0176-0002.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/26/2006
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
People
 click to show/hide detail

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -
Michigan University School of Law