Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. ROWTOWN

November 21, 2005.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, MASUMEH ZANGANEH, Individual, Intervener,
v.
ROWTOWN, INC. D/B/A THE FISH HOPPER RESTAURANT, Defendant.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: RONALD WHYTE, District Judge

CONSENT DECREE

I. INTRODUCTION

  On April 10, 2003, Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC" or "Commission") filed this action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. The EEOC alleged that Defendant Rowtown Inc. d/b/a The Fish Hopper Restaurant ("Defendant") discriminated against Charging Party Masumeh Zanganeh and other similarly situated female employees. Specifically, the EEOC alleged that the women were subjected to a sexually hostile work environment and that Ms. Zanganeh was retaliated against for her complaints about the harassment. The EEOC further alleges that Ms. Zanganeh was constructively discharged due to retaliation and Defendant's failure to take corrective action in response to her complaint.

  The First Hopper denies the EEOC's and Ms. Zanganeh's allegations. The First Hopper became aware of virtually all of Ms. Zanganeh's complaints of sexual harassment after the voluntarily resigned and field a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC. During her tenure, The Fish Hopper was aware of only one of her complaints of sexual harassment, perpetrated by a coworker, and The Fish Hopper terminated the employment of that coworker. The Fish Hopper denies that Ms. Zanganeh ever complained to any member of management about any of the other allegations of sexual harassment made in this action. Regarding the complaints of the similarly situated females, The Fish Hopper was aware of only one complaint by on claimant and took appropriate corrective action immediately after becoming aware of the complaint. The Fish Hopper denies that any of the remaining claimants reported the alleged sexual harassment or that it has reason to know of the alleged harassment and claims that it is therefore not liable for the alleged harassment.

  II. NON-ADMISSION OF LIABILITY

  This consent decree is not an adjudication or finding on the merits of this and shall not be construed as an admission of a violation of Title VII by Defendants.

  The Court has reviewed the terms of this Consent Decree in light of the pleadings, the record herein, and the applicable law, and now approves the Consent Decree in its entirely.

  Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:
III. GENERAL PROVISIONS
  1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and parties to this action.

  2. This Consent Decree constitutes a full resolution of the EEOC's complaint and the Intervener's Amended Complaint in Intervention in Civil Action C-03-01522-RMW (HRL).

  3. This Consent Decree shall become effective upon its entry by the Court. 4. This Consent Decree is final and binding upon the Parties, their successors and assigns.

  5. The EEOC and Defendant shall bear their own costs and attorney fees.

  IV. GENERAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

  1. Sexual Harassment

  Defendant, its officers, agents, management (including all supervisory employees, successors and assigns, and all those in active concert or participation with them, or any of them, hereby agree not to: (a) engage in or be a party to any action, policy or practice that is intended to or is known to them to have the effect of sexually harassing or intimidating any employee on the basis of sex; or (c) create, facilitate or permit the existence of discrimination on the basis of sex.

  2. Retaliation

  Defendant, its officers, agents management (including supervisory employees), successors or assigns, and all those in active concert or participation wit them, agree not to engage in, implement or permit any action, policy or practice with he purpose of retaliating against any current or former employee of Defendant because he or she complained about sexual harassment, filed a charge of discrimination alleging any such practice; testified or participated in any manner in any investigation (including, without limitation, any internal investigation undertaken by Defendant), proceedings or ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.