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. Custom Fabrication & Engineering

United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division

July 22, 2019

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
v.
CUSTOM FABRICATION & ENGINEERING d/b/a MIDWEST AUTOMATION CUSTOM FABRICATION INC. Defendant.

          Counsel for Plaintiff, JAMESL.LEE, Acting General Counsel, GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS, Associate General Counsel, FA YE A. WILLIAMS Regional Attorne, EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION.

          Counsel for Defendant ROY GEAN, III, GEAN LAW FIRM, ROY GEAN, III

          PAMELA B. DIXON Senior Trial Attorney.

          CONSENT DECREE

          P.K.HOLMES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Commission) and Defendant Custom Fabrication & Engineering d/b/a Midwest Automation Custom Fabrication, Inc. (Defendant or Custom) reached an agreement to resolve this case following settlement negotiations. The Parties jointly submit this Consent Decree (Decree) for the Court's review, approval, and entry to resolve the claim of disability discrimination alleged in the Commission's Complaint.

         The Commission is an agency of the United States of America and enforces federal laws prohibiting discrimination in the workplace. The Americans with Disabilities Act and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 represent two of the federal laws enforced by the Commission.

         The Commission instituted this action on behalf of Larry Batt.[1] The Commission alleged in its Complaint that Defendant refused to permit Mr. Batt to return to work following an illness and then terminated his employment in violation of the ADA.

         Defendant denies the allegations in the Commission's Complaint that it engaged in any unlawful employment practices in violation of the ADA. This Decree does not constitute a finding on the merits of the case and does not constitute an admission by Defendant of the allegations in the Complaint. The Parties have consented to entry of this Decree to avoid the additional expense and other burdens that continued litigation of this case would involve.

         This Decree constitutes the complete and exclusive agreement of the Parties with respect to the matters referenced herein. No. waiver, modification, or amendment of any provision of this Decree shall be effective unless made in writing and signed by all Parties. The Parties have made no representations or inducements to compromise this action other than those recited or referenced in this Decree. The Parties stipulate that the terms and conditions of this Decree serve to effectuate the purposes of the ADA.

         FINDINGS

         This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and the Parties. After a careful examination of the Decree, the pleadings, and the record, this Court finds the terms of this Decree are adequate, fair, reasonable, equitable, and just. The terms of the Decree also serve the public interest in eradicating discrimination based on disability. The Decree furthers the objectives of the ADA and adequately protects the rights of the Parties and the public interest.

         If the Court does not approve this Decree, the Parties agree not to admit the Decree into evidence in any subsequent proceeding in this lawsuit.

         It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED:

         SCOPE AND DURATION OF DECREE

         This Decree resolves all issues and claims arising out of the Commission's Complaint which arose from Charge No. 493-2017-00412. This Decree does not impact any pending charges, if any, that may currently exist before the EEOC in the United States. Further, this Decree does not affect EEOC's right to process any other pending or future charges that any employee or applicant may file against Defendant and to commence civil actions on any such charges.

         The Parties agree the United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, Fort Smith Division, has jurisdiction over the Parties and the subject matter of this litigation for the duration of the Decree. Neither Party shall contest the jurisdiction of this Court to enforce this Decree. Upon the date the Court enters the Decree, the provisions of this Decree become immediately effective and binding upon the Parties to this lawsuit for six months after the entry date of this Decree.

         INJUNCTIVE ...


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.