Case: PUENTE v. STATE OF ARIZONA

2:97-cv-01734 | U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

Filed Date: Aug. 15, 1997

Closed Date: June 12, 2007

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On August 15, 1997 plaintiffs filed suit against their employer, the Arizona Department of Transportation, alleging that it had racially discriminated against Hispanics in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and Title VII (42 U.S.C. § 2000e) in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Specifically they alleged that the defendant had engaged in discrimination by using unfair hiring and promotion practices, engaging in inadequate training, and creating a hostile…

On August 15, 1997 plaintiffs filed suit against their employer, the Arizona Department of Transportation, alleging that it had racially discriminated against Hispanics in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and Title VII (42 U.S.C. § 2000e) in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Specifically they alleged that the defendant had engaged in discrimination by using unfair hiring and promotion practices, engaging in inadequate training, and creating a hostile work environment for Hispanic employees.

On March 15, 1999 the district court (Judge Roger Strand) certified a plaintiff class consisting of all applicants to and employees of the defendants. On December 19, 2000 the district court (Judge Strand) approved and entered a consent decree between the parties. The consent decree provided that the defendant would use neutral hiring and promoting protocols and make opportunities available to Hispanics, conduct employee evaluations in a neutral manner, forbid discrimination and any creation of a hostile work environment, hire an outside consultant to train employees on how to best implement the decree, accept a monitor, and institute a complaint resolution procedure. It also provided that the defendant would pay plaintiffs' attorneys fees and that the named class representatives could seek damages for past discrimination.

Five of the class representatives sought damages and bench trials were held by Magistrate Judge Virginia Mathis in 2003. Reports and recommendations in favor of the defendant were issued in all five cases. On April 10 and 11, 2007 the district court (Judge Strand) entered final judgment on these claims. The court adopted the Magistrate's Report in favor of the defendant regarding four of the individual claims, making minor changes to three of them. On the fifth claim the court adopted the Report in favor of the defendant in part put entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff regarding allegations of creating a hostile work environment. This plaintiff was awarded $18,000 plus fees.

Summary Authors

Michael Perry (10/9/2010)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4700707/parties/puente-v-arizona-state-of/


Judge(s)

Bolton, Susan Ritchie (Arizona)

Mathis, Virginia A. (Arizona)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Bonnett, Daniel Lee (Arizona)

Pochoda, Daniel Joseph (Arizona)

Attorney for Defendant

Hudson, Lisa Kaye (Arizona)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:97-cv-01734

Docket

Puente v. Arizona

Sept. 27, 2007

Sept. 27, 2007

Docket
170

2:97-cv-01734

Consent Decree

Dec. 19, 2000

Dec. 19, 2000

Settlement Agreement
357

2:97-cv-01734

Opinion (Adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in favor of the defendant with revisions)

April 10, 2007

April 10, 2007

Order/Opinion

2007 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 27485

359

2:97-cv-01734

Opinion (Adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in favor of the defendant in part)

April 11, 2007

April 11, 2007

Order/Opinion

2007 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 27482

354

2:97-cv-01734

Opinion (Adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in favor of the defendant)

April 11, 2007

April 11, 2007

Order/Opinion

2007 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 27328

358

2:97-cv-01734

Opinion (Adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation in favor of the defendant with amendments)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

Order/Opinion

2007 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 27479

356

2:97-cv-01734

Opinion (Adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge in favor of the defendant with revisions)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

Order/Opinion

2007 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 27481

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4700707/puente-v-arizona-state-of/

Last updated April 19, 2025, 2:12 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
354

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation in part. [Doc. # 222]. FURTHER ORDERED with respect to Plaintiff's Claim One and Claim Two, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's findings of fact and conclusions of law as wri tten and as modified and supplemented herein. FURTHER ORDERED with respect to Plaintiff's Claim Three, the Court declines to adopt the Magistrate Judge's findings of fact contained in paragraph forty and the conclusions of law relating ther eto and further finds that Plaintiff is entitled to recover the sum of $18,000.00 from Defendants as damages for emotional distress endured in violation of his federal constitutional rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. FURTHER ORDERE D, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, awarding Plaintiff's attorneys the sum of $6,000.00 as attorney's fees with respect to this claim. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment in accordance with this order. Signed by Judge Roger G Strand on 4/10/07. (SAT)

April 11, 2007

April 11, 2007

RECAP
356

ORDER - IT IS FURTHER ORDERED adopting the revised Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's claims be denied. [Doc. # 230]. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims of discrimination and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., be denied. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment in accordance with this order. Signed by Judge Roger G Strand on 4/10/07. (SAT)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

RECAP
357

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED revising the Report as noted above. FURTHER ORDERED adopting the revised Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's claim be denied. [Doc. # 257]. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims of retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., be denied. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment in accordance with this order. Signed by Judge Roger G Strand on 4/10/07. (SAT)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

RECAP
358

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED revising the Report as noted above. FURTHER ORDERED adopting the revised Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's claim be denied. [Doc. # 305]. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims of disparate tre atment and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., be denied. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment in accordance with this order. Signed by Judge Roger G Strand on 4/10/07. (SAT)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

RECAP
359

ORDER - IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation in part. [Doc. # 317]. FURTHER ORDERED, with respect to all claims other than the creation of a hostile work environment, adopting the Report and Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff& #039;s claims be denied. FURTHER ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation recommending that Defendants' March 8, 2005 Motions to Dismiss be denied. FURTHER ORDERED with respect to Plaintiff's claim of a hostile work environment, in vi olation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., the Court declines to adopt the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Conclusions. FURTHER ORDERED that with respect to Plaintiff's claim for emotional distress experi enced in a racially hostile work environment that Plaintiff is entitled to recover the sum of $18,000.00 from Defendants as damages for the violation of his federal constitutional rights under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, awarding Plaintiff's attorneys the sum of $6,000.00 as attorney's fees with respect to this claim. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment in accordance with this order. Signed by Judge Roger G Strand on 4/11/07. (SAT)

April 12, 2007

April 12, 2007

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Arizona

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

Private Employment Class Actions

Key Dates

Filing Date: Aug. 15, 1997

Closing Date: June 12, 2007

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Hispanic applicants to and employees of the Arizona Department of Transportation

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Granted

Defendants

Arizona Department of Transportation (Phoenix, Maricopa), State

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

42 U.S.C. § 1981

Title VII (including PDA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Utilize objective hiring/promotion criteria

Follow recruitment, hiring, or promotion protocols

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Monitoring

Amount Defendant Pays: $272,000

Order Duration: 2000 - 2002

Issues

General/Misc.:

Retaliation

Discrimination Area:

Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc.)

Disparate Impact

Disparate Treatment

Harassment / Hostile Work Environment

Hiring

Promotion

Training

Discrimination Basis:

National origin discrimination

Affected National Origin/Ethnicity(s):

Hispanic