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

Similar documents
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 DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

) 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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII CV

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

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

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

)

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

5:06cv1684 JUDGE HICKS MAG. JUDGE HORNSBY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

-CIVIL RIGHTS EMPLOYMENT

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

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 DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

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

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

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

)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demand)

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

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

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

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

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

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 ) ) ) ) )

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

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


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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. -v- Civil No. 3:12-cv-4176

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

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

Case5:11-cv EJD Document28 Filed09/09/11 Page1 of 10

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

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

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

Case 5:11-cv F Document 13 Filed 01/24/12 Page 1 of 9

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION Case No. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

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 3:12-cv M Document 6 Filed 11/07/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID 18

Case 5:14-cv DAE Document 4 Filed 11/10/14 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

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

1/29/2019 8:49 AM 19CV04626

Case 0:10-cv KMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/10/2010 Page 1 of 7

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

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

Case 6:17-cv Document 1 Filed 10/24/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA LAFAYETTE DIVISION

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 KMT Document 1 Filed 09/24/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/30/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1. No.: Defendants.

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

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 1:13-cv KMW Document 38 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/04/2013 Page 1 of 22

Case 3:19-cv Document 1 Filed 01/30/19 Page 1 of 17

Case 3:16-cv L Document 1 Filed 11/01/16 Page 1 of 9 PageID 1

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

Transcription:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA STATESVILLE DIVISION EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. WEST FRONT STREET FOODS, LLC d/b/a COMPARE FOODS, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMAND NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the bases of race and national origin and to provide appropriate relief to Robert Bruce who was adversely affected by the practices. Specifically, Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( the Commission alleges that Defendant West Front Street Foods, LLC d/b/a Compare Foods ( Defendant discriminated against Robert Bruce by discharging him because of his race, White, and national origin, non-hispanic. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 706(f(1 and (3 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e 5(f(1 and (3 ( Title VII, and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. 1981a.

2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina. PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the Commission, is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Sections 706(f(1 and (3 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f(1 and (3. 4. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been a North Carolina limited liability company doing business in the State of North Carolina and the City of Statesville and has continuously had at least fifteen employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce under Sections 701(b, (g and (h of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e(b, (g and (h. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Robert Bruce filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 7. On or around March 4, 2006, Defendant engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Statesville, North Carolina store, in violation of Section 703(a(1 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a(1. Specifically, Defendant discharged Robert Bruce, a non-hispanic/white meat cutter, because of his national origin and race. At the time of his discharge, Mr. Bruce was performing his job at a level that met Defendant s legitimate expectations. Defendant replaced Mr. Bruce with a Hispanic individual. 2

8. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 7 above has been to deprive Robert Bruce of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect his status as an employee because of his national origin and race, non-hispanic/white. 9. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were intentional. 10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Robert Bruce. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in any employment practice that discriminates on the bases of national origin or race. B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs that provide equal employment opportunities for non-hispanics, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Defendant to make whole Robert Bruce by providing appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of the unlawful employment practices described in paragraph 7 above. D. Order Defendant to make whole Robert Bruce by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraph 7 above, including but not limited to job search expenses, in amounts to be determined at trial. 3

E. Order Defendant to make whole Robert Bruce by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 7 above, including but not limited to emotional pain, suffering, stress, headaches, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation, loss of self-esteem and loss of civil rights, in amounts to be determined at trial. F. Order Defendant to pay Robert Bruce punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct, as described above, in amounts to be determined at trial. interest. G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public H. Award the Commission its costs of this action. JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint. DATED this the 8 th day of September, 2008. Respectfully submitted, RONALD S. COOPER General Counsel JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel 1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507 s/lynette A. Barnes LYNETTE A. BARNES (N.C. Bar No. 19732 Regional Attorney e-mail: lynette.barnes@eeoc.gov 4

TINA BURNSIDE (WI Bar No. 1026965 Supervisory Trial Attorney e-mail: tina.burnside@eeoc.gov s/ Mary M. Ryerse MARY M. RYERSE (S.C. Bar No. 68387 Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION e-mail: mary.ryerse@eeoc.gov Charlotte District Office 129 W. Trade Street, Suite 400 Charlotte, North Carolina 28202 Telephone: 704.344.6886 Facsimile: 704.344.6780 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 5