University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name EEOC v. ROBERT L REEVES & ASSOCIATES EE-CA-0125
Docket / Court 2:00-cv-10515-DT-RZ ( C.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Equal Employment
Special Collection EEOC Study -- in sample
Attorney Organization EEOC
Case Summary
In September 2000, the Los Angeles District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against the law firm Robert L Reeves & Associates in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging discrimination on the basis of gender, female, and pregnancy-based discrimination in ... read more >
In September 2000, the Los Angeles District Office of the EEOC filed this lawsuit against the law firm Robert L Reeves & Associates in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging discrimination on the basis of gender, female, and pregnancy-based discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978. We do not have a copy of the complaint; therefore, the exact allegations involved are unknown. However it appears from the various motions that the defendant was accused of maintaining a sexually hostile environment and terminating the employment of some complainants based upon their pregnancies.

Following extensive discovery and a series of successful motions for partial summary judgment for the defendant, the District Court granted summary judgment for the defendant as to the remaining claimants and entered final judgment for the defendants in March 2002. The EEOC appealed this decision to the U.S. Appeals Court for the Ninth Circuit in May 2002, which reversed and remanded the decision back to the District Court. Following this remand and extensive discovery, the case was heard before a jury in October 2005. The jury found in favor of the defendants, and judgment was entered in November 2005. Costs were taxed against the EEOC in the amount of $7,234.49, and attorney expenses were granted in the amount of $1,022,653.69 ($995,780.72 in attorneys' fees and $26,872.97 in expenses). The EEOC appealed the judgment to the U.S. Appeals Court for the Ninth Circuit again in January 2006, which affirmed the District Court's judgment for the defendant in February 2008.

Daisy Manning - 04/23/2008


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Affected Gender
Female
Discrimination-area
Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff
Harassment / Hostile Work Environment
Discrimination-basis
Pregnancy discrimination
Sex discrimination
EEOC-centric
Direct Suit on Merits
General
Disparate Treatment
Plaintiff Type
EEOC Plaintiff
Causes of Action Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000e
Defendant(s) Robert L Reeves & Associates
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 Defendant
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief None
Source of Relief None
Case Closing Year 2002
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)
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)
Citation: 101 Colum. L. Rev. 458 (2001)
[ Detail ] [ External Link ]

Docket(s)
2:00-cv-10515-DT-RZ (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-9000.pdf | Detail
Date: 10/18/2006
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Order Denying Ex-Parte Application for Protective Order [ECF# 27] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0002.pdf | Detail
Date: 05/25/2001
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Denying Plaintiff's U.S. EEOC's Motion for Review and Reconsideration of Magistrate Judge's Order on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and Ordering Clarification of the Magistrate Judge's Protective Order [ECF# 73] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0003.pdf | Detail
Date: 07/27/2001
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order on Motion to Compel [in part] [ECF# 114] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0004.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/06/2001
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Denying Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for Court Order to Compel Witness for Deposition [ECF# 133] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0005.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/19/2001
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [in part] [ECF# 137] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0006.pdf | Detail
Date: 09/24/2001
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Revised Partial Summary Judgment Order [ECF# 155] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0007.pdf | Detail
Date: 10/18/2001
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order [ECF# 192] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0008.pdf | Detail
Date: 11/30/2001
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [in part] [ECF# 225] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0009.pdf | Detail
Date: 01/22/2002
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order on Summary Judgment (2003 WL 1634013 / 2002 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 9019) (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0014.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Date: 02/19/2002
Source: Westlaw
Appeals Court Reverses Dismissal of EEOC Suit Against Reeves Law Firm in California [EEOC Press Release]
EE-CA-0125-0001.pdf | Detail
Date: 06/25/2003
Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff EEOC's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Defendant's Affirmative Defenses, Nos. 14 & 15 (2003 WL 22999369 / 2003 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 24701) (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0015.pdf | WESTLAW| LEXIS | Detail
Date: 12/08/2003
Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Dismissal [in part] [ECF# 430] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0011.pdf | Detail
Date: 03/22/2004
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judgment on Jury Verdict [ECF# 639] (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0012.pdf | Detail
Date: 11/17/2005
Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Defendant's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Expenses (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0013.pdf | Detail
Date: 01/13/2006
Source: District Court
Judges Tevrizian, Dickran M. Jr. (C.D. Cal.)
EE-CA-0125-0003
Zarefsky, Ralph (C.D. Cal.) [Magistrate]
EE-CA-0125-0002 | EE-CA-0125-0004 | EE-CA-0125-0005
Defendant's Lawyers Miller Savitt, Linda C (California)
EE-CA-0125-0004
Schaedel, John P.
EE-CA-0125-0004

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -