IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS eu,:".' IJ~:'LD~~?~:~~URT EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

NATURE OF THE ACTION. This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the

Case 2:09-cv BSJ-RLE Document 67 Filed 10/28/11 Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Case 4:07-cv JLH Document 1 Filed 06/29/2007 ( Page 1 of 6

Case 3:04-cv RLA Document 1-1 Filed 09/30/2004 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII CV

Case 1:18-cv RDB Document 1 Filed 07/30/18 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE DIVISION

Case 3:11-cv CRW-TJS Document 1 Filed 04/06/11 Page 1 of 7

Case 3:04-cv JSW Document 168 Filed 10/20/2005 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ~,~,~,,.c~...,... ~~"~ ~ " FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLI~ SEP -9 ;i ~ [~: 0~ CBA~OTTE OIVlSlON

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION NATURE OF THE ACTION

Case 4:16-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/29/16 Page 1 of 7

Case 3:06-cv JAP-TJB Document 1 Filed 03/27/2006 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 07/20/17 Page 1 of 8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA DAVENPORT DIVISION. Nature Of The Action

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 1-2 Filed: 06/03/09 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:2

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA NATURE OF THE ACTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

)

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 09/27/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 1:11-cv LG-JCG Document 2 Filed 11/17/11 Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA. Plaintiff, Defendant. AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND NATURE OF ACTION

5:06cv1684 JUDGE HICKS MAG. JUDGE HORNSBY

This is an action under the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008

-CIVIL RIGHTS EMPLOYMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HA WAIl. Case No.: NATURE OF THE ACTION AND JURISDICTION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA DUBLIN DIVISION

Case 4:04-cv LLP Document 1 Filed 12/28/2004 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demand)

Case 2:14-cv MPK Document 1 Filed 04/22/14 Page 1 of 6

) I ClV a S - BUN. 18 This is an action under Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR~A I FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINO~ STRA~ E EASTERN DIVISION 0~U ) ) tl0v 1 0 7_604 ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

Case 2:05-cv JES-SPC Document 47 Filed 04/24/2006 Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

Case 7:17-cv KMK Document 1 Filed 07/06/17 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION CONSENT DECREE. Tbe Litigation

Case 4:05-cv CLS Document 1 Filed 05/26/2005 Page 1 of 6

Case 9:06-cv RHC Document 1 Filed 02/28/2006 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN TI-[E UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. ..-ECHOSTAR COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION n/k/a DISH, LTD.,

Case 6:10-cv TC Document 1 Filed 09/24/10 Page 1 of 7 Page ID#: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

FILED. , #, Case 5:05-cv WRF Document 29 Filed 06/06/2006Page 1 of 9 JUN COMMISSION, Plaintiff, ALICIA MANSEL, Civil Action No.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

Case 1:13-cv Document 1 Filed 06/28/13 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Case: 1:06-cv JRA Doc #: 28 Filed: 05/08/09 1 of 9. PageID #: 220

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 1 Filed 08/05/16 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT. FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLIll~ STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DIVISION CONSENT DECREE THE LITIGATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintitl, Defendants. COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

Case: 1:13-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/25/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1

Case 1:06-cv LTB-CBS Document 1 Filed 09/29/2006 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT PIERCE DIVISION

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT OF THE UNITED STATES EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:

PLAINTIFF AVA SMITH- THOMPSON S COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT SARA LEE CORPORATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

Introduction. Jurisdiction. Parties

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Bob Watson Chevrolet

CASE NO. 5:00-CV COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION ON BEHALF OF JACKQULINE STOKES

Case 1:15-cv KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/13/2015 Page 1 of 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT STATE OF RHODE ISLAND COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/21/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT STATE OF RHODE ISLAND COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

Case 1:14-cv KAM-JO Document 8 Filed 07/02/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 36

2:04-cv HAB-DGB # 1 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS URBANA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 8:04-cv SCB-TBM Document 32 Filed 10/07/2005 Page 1 of 6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DIVISION OF OHIO EASTERN DISTRICT


Case 1:13-cv LEK-KSC Document 1 Filed 12/18/13 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

Case 2:16-cv GMN-VCF Document 1 Filed 04/26/16 Page 1 of 10

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

2. One of the defendant in the case is Parker & Gould (P&G). What is exactly P&G?

EEOC v. Ealge Wings Industries, Inc.

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/18/14 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1

EEOC v. Bice of Chicago, et al.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Studley Products, Inc. and Wildwood Industries, Inc., Defendants.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 119 Filed: 03/08/16 Page 1 of 16 PageID #:708

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Case 2:07-cv JFB-WDW Document 15-2 Filed 10/11/2007 Page 1 of 10 CIVIL ACTION INTRODUCTION

United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Jetson Midwest Mailers, Inc., Defendant.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 02/10/14 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION NO. } 1 COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES

Case 5:15-cv SAC-KGS Document 1 Filed 08/06/15 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Transcription:

U. S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F I L E Ie,", Si:P 2 7 Z005 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS eu,:".' IJ~:'LD~~?~:~~URT EASTERN DIVISION Plaintiff, GLENVIEW CAR WASH Defendants. ------------------------------ NATUR~~ OF THE ACTION COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ~JUDGE RONALD GUZMAN MAGISTRATE JUDGE NOLAN This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Aet of 1964. as amended, 42 U.S.c. 2000e et seq. ("Tit.le VTr', and Title I of the Ci vi 1 Rights Aet of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and retaliation and to provide appropriate relief to a class of male employees who were adversely affected by such practices. Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" or "Commission" alleges that Thc Glenview Car Wash, Tne. ("Glenview" subjected Diego Perez, Fidencio Atimo, and Elmer Bettencourt (collectively referred to hereafter as "Charging Parties", and a class of male employees to harassment on the basis of sex. EEOC also alleges that Glenview retaliated against Charging Patty Elmer Bellencourt and a elass of employees by terminating their employment. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.c.!i 451, 1331, 1337, 1343, and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706(t(J and (3 of

Title VB, 42 U.S.c. 2000e-S(f(I and (3, and 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.c. 1981A. 2. The employment practices hereafter alleged to be unlawful were and are now heing committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Tllinois, Eastern Division. PARTIES 3. Plainti IT, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, is an agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation, and enforcement of Title Vll and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(f(I and (3 of Title VII, 421.LS.C. Section 2000e-S(f(l and (3. 4. At all times relevant, Glenview has continuously been doing business in the Northern District of Illinois and has continuously had at least fifteen employees. 5. At all times relevant, Glenview has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b, (g and (h of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. Sections 2000e(b, (g and (h. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Charging Parties filed charges with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Glenview. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been ful fi lled. 7. Since at least August 1988, Glenview has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its car wash facility at 1820 Waukegan Road, Glenview, Illinois, in violation of Sections 701(k and 703(a of Title Vll, 42 U.S.c. Sections 2000e(k and 2(a. Such unlawful 2

employment practices have included: 1 subjecting Charging Parties and a class of male employees to harassment and a hostile work environment because of their sex; 2 retaliating against some Charging Parties and a class or male employees by subjecting them to termination. 8. The effect of the practices complained of above has been to deprive Charging Parties. and a class of male employees adversely affected by the discriminatory actions, of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex and for opposing practices made unlawful by Title Vll or for engaging in activities protected by Title VII. 9. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were intentional. 10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Charging Parties and a class of male employees because of their sex. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this COutt: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Glenview, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or pruticipation with it, from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates hecause of sex. B. Grant a pemlanent injunction enjoining Glenview, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert Or participation with it, from retaliating against any employee for opposing practices made unlawful under Title Vll or for engaging in activities 3

protected by Title VII. C. Ordcr Glenview to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which eradicate the effe~ts of its past and present unlawful practices. D. Order Glenview to make whole Charging Partics and the affected class by providing appropriatc back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts tu bc determined at trial, and uther affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices, including reinstatement where appropriate. E. Order Glenview to make whole Charging Parties and the affected class by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary lusses resulting from tbe unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, in amounts to be determined at (lial. f. Order Glenview to make whole Charging Parties and the affected class by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained uf in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including emotional pain, inconvenience, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial. G. Order Glenview to pay Charging Parties and the affected class punitive damages for their malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, in amounts tu be determined at trial. H. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest; and 1. Award the Commission its costs in this action. 4

JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests ajury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint. Respectfully submitted, James Lee Deputy General Counsel Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 "L" Ethan M. M. Cohen A.R.D.C. No. 06206781 U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 500 W. Madison, Suite 2800 Chicago, Illinois 60661 (312 353~7568 Trial Attorney 5