UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

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

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

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

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

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 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

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

)

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF HAWAII CV

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NATURE OF THE ACTION

EEOC v. Merrill Pine Ridge, LLC

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

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

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

-CIVIL RIGHTS EMPLOYMENT

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

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

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

COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Demand)

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

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

5:06cv1684 JUDGE HICKS MAG. JUDGE HORNSBY

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

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

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

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

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 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.

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

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

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 MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

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

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 SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

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

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

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 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

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

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 DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION. Plaintitl, Defendants. COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND

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

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

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

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

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

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

10/18/ :38 AM 18CV47218 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH. Case No. COMPLAINT.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

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

EEOC v. Mason County Forest Products, LLC

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

EEOC v. Ealge Wings Industries, Inc.

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

Case 3:14-cv BR Document 1 Filed 06/24/14 Page 1 of 7 Page ID#: 1

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COU~ NOV - FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS~i.~ SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA. Plaintiff Sharolynn L. Griffiths, by and through her undersigned counsel, by way of JURISDICTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF-INTERVENOR

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI CENTRAL DIVISION

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Introduction. Jurisdiction. Parties

Case 2:15-cv LFR Document 1 Filed 11/11/15 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

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

Case 8:11-cv PJM Document 1 Filed 05/05/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

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

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

EEOC v. Baldwin Supply Co.

EEOC v. NEA-Alaska, Inc.

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

EEOC and Maria Torres v. The Restaurant Company dba Perkins

Transcription:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ) COMMISSION, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Civil Action No. 2:14-cv-1186 ) v. ) ) COMPLAINT HUFCOR, INC., d/b/a Total Quality Plastics, ) (Jury trial demanded) ) Defendant. ) ) 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 basis of sex and retaliation, and to provide appropriate relief to Katy Degenhardt, who was adversely affected by such practices. As alleged with greater particularity below, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleges that since April 2009, Hufcor, Inc., d/b/a Total Quality Plastics, has violated Title VII by subjecting Ms. Degenhardt to sexual harassment and then retaliating against her for resisting that harassment. 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 ( Title VII ), as amended (42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3)), and Section 102 of Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (42 U.S.C. 1981a). 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were and are now being committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Case 2:14-cv-01186-LA Filed 09/25/14 Page 1 of 6 Document 1

PARTIES 3. The plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ( EEOC ) is the agency of the United States of America charged with administering, interpreting, and enforcing Title VII, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, defendant Hufcor, Inc. ( Hufcor ), which is headquartered in Janesville, Wisconsin, has continuously been a corporation doing business in Wisconsin, in addition to doing business in other states, and has continuously had at least 15 employees. 5. At all relevant times, Hufcor 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. 2000e(b), (g), and (h)). STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. On or about September 23, 2011, more than 30 days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Katy Degenhardt filed a charge with the EEOC alleging violations of Title VII by Total Quality Plastics ( TQP ), a division of Hufcor. 7. On May 16, 2014, the EEOC determined that there was reasonable cause to believe that Hufcor had violated Title VII, as amended, by subjecting Ms. Degenhardt to sexual harassment and then retaliating against her for resisting that harassment. 8. The conciliation efforts required by law have occurred and were unsuccessful. (a) On May 16, 2014, the EEOC issued a Determination letter inviting Hufcor to join with the EEOC in informal methods of conciliation to endeavor to eliminate the discriminatory practices and provide appropriate relief to Ms. Degenhardt. (b) On July 29, 2014, the EEOC issued a letter advising Hufcor that, despite 2 Case 2:14-cv-01186-LA Filed 09/25/14 Page 2 of 6 Document 1

its efforts, the EEOC was unable to secure from Hufcor a conciliation agreement acceptable to the EEOC. 9. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 10. From May 7, 2007, through February 20, 2013, Ms. Degenhardt worked as a machine operator at TQP s manufacturing facility in North Prairie, Wisconsin. 11. Since at least April 2009, Hufcor has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its TQP facility in North Prairie, Wisconsin, in continuing violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2(a), as follows: one or more male TQP supervisors and employees continuously subjected Ms. Degenhardt, who is a woman, to sexual harassment for example, on a regular basis the shift supervisor would grab her, rub against her breasts, and walk behind her and brush his penis against her buttocks, and once came up behind her, put his hands up her shirt, and touched her breasts, in full sight of one of Ms. Degenhardt s male co-workers which created a sexually hostile and offensive work environment for her. Despite actual or constructive notice (including timely complaints by Ms. Degenhardt to appropriate Hufcor and TQP officials) that it was discriminating against her on the basis of her sex (female), Hufcor failed and refused to take prompt and appropriate action to correct the harassment and the resulting hostile environment. 12. Beginning in April 2009, Hufcor violated Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. 2000e-3(a), by retaliating against Ms. Degenhardt by denying her breaks, assigning her difficult work, denying her advancement opportunities, disciplining her for alleged infractions where others were not punished for the same actions, and taking other adverse actions against her after she opposed sexual harassment by one or more Hufcor supervisors and employees and thus engaged in activity protected by Title VII. 3 Case 2:14-cv-01186-LA Filed 09/25/14 Page 3 of 6 Document 1

13. The effect of the practices complained of in Paragraph 11 above has been to deprive Ms. Degenhardt of equal employment opportunities, and to otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee, because of sex. 14. The effect of the practices complained of in Paragraph 12 above has been to deprive Ms. Degenhardt of equal employment opportunities, and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee, because she engaged in protected activity under Title VII. 15. The unlawful employment practices complained of in Paragraphs 11 and 12 above were intentional. 16. The unlawful employment practices complained of in Paragraphs 11 and 12 above were done with malice and with reckless indifference to Ms. Degenhardt s federally-protected rights. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the EEOC respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Hufcor and its subsidiaries, officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from limiting, segregating, or classifying any employee in any way which would deprive, or tend to deprive, that employee of employment opportunities or otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee because of her sex; from engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the basis of sex; and from engaging in discrimination based on retaliation and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of having filed a charge with the EEOC or otherwise invoking the protections of Title VII or assisting others in doing so. B. Order Hufcor to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for women and for individuals who have filed a charge 4 Case 2:14-cv-01186-LA Filed 09/25/14 Page 4 of 6 Document 1

with the EEOC or who otherwise avail themselves of the protections of Title VII or assist others in doing so, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. C. Order Hufcor to make Katy Degenhardt whole by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in Paragraphs 11 and 12 above, including medical expenses, emotional pain, suffering, and inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial. D. Order Hufcor to pay punitive damages to Katy Degenhardt for its malicious and reckless conduct, as described in Paragraphs 11 and 12 above, in amounts to be determined at trial. interest. E. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public F. Award the EEOC its costs of this action. JURY TRIAL DEMAND The EEOC requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its Complaint. Respectfully submitted, P. David Lopez General Counsel James L. Lee Deputy General Counsel Gwendolyn Young Reams Associate General Counsel EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 131 M Street, N.E. 5 Case 2:14-cv-01186-LA Filed 09/25/14 Page 5 of 6 Document 1

Washington, DC 20507 John C. Hendrickson Regional Attorney Jean P. Kamp Associate Regional Attorney EEOC Chicago District Office 500 West Madison Street - Suite 2000 Chicago, IL 60661 Telephone: (312) 869-8116 (Kamp) Fax: (312) 869-8124 E-mail: john.hendrickson@eeoc.gov E-mail: jean.kamp@eeoc.gov Dated: September 25, 2014 s/ Dennis R. McBride Dennis R. McBride (WI Bar No. 1000430) Senior Trial Attorney EEOC Milwaukee Area Office 310 West Wisconsin Avenue - Suite 800 Milwaukee, WI 53203-2292 Telephone: (414) 297-4188 Fax: (414) 297-3146 E-mail: dennis.mcbride@eeoc.gov 6 Case 2:14-cv-01186-LA Filed 09/25/14 Page 6 of 6 Document 1