Case: EEOC v. Whirlpool Corporation

3:06-cv-00593 | U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee

Filed Date: June 1, 2006

Closed Date: June 12, 2012

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The Memphis District Office and Nashville Area Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought this lawsuit against Whirlpool Corporation on June 9, 2006, in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. Judge John T. Nixon was assigned to this case. The complaint alleged sexual and racial harassment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief for the individual complainant and attorneys fees for …

Specifically, the complaint was brought after an African-American employee of Whirlpool complained that a fellow employee had racially and sexually harassed her. The harassment eventually led to the harasser physically attacking the complainant. Prior to the attack, the complainant complained to her supervisors about the harasser’s racialized and sexualized comments toward her, but her supervisors did very little to address her concerns. At one point, she complained to the supervisor and he responded by saying: “why don’t you just go ahead and f#@k him and get it over with?” After constantly rejecting the harasser’s sexual advances, the harasser physically attacked the complainant. The complainant eventually quit her job with Whirlpool Corporation because her therapist and psychologist advised her to do so. The complainant intervened in the case on July 24, 2006.

For the next two years, the parties engaged in discovery.

On December 21, 2009, the court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. The court awarded monetary relief in back pay, front pay, and compensatory damages in the amount of $1,073,261. The court did not award any punitive damages. The court also did not grant any injunctive relief, stating that "because the workplace at issue, Defendant’s LaVergne Division, closed as of August 15, 2008 and Plaintiffs did not renew their request for this relief in their post-trial papers, the Court will not now grant injunctive or declaratory relief."

On February 20, 2010, the plaintiffs moved for attorney fees and costs. The court granted the plaintiff $215,015 in attorneys fees and costs on August 2, 2011.

Meanwhile, on April 26, 2011, the defendant appealed the district court's December ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Without stating a reason, the parties then jointly moved to dismiss the appeal. The Sixth Circuit granted this joint motion on June 12, 2012, and the case is now closed.

show full summary

Summary Authors

Kevin Wilemon (8/9/2008)

Sean Whetstone (6/4/2018)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4788432/parties/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-whirlpool-corporation/

Judge(s)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dills, Steven W. (Tennessee)

Attorney for Defendant

Backus, Asilia S. (Illinois)

Christlieb, David (Illinois)

Garrett, Timothy K. (Tennessee)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Allman, Andy L. (Tennessee)

Judge(s)

Nixon, John Trice (Tennessee)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Dills, Steven W. (Tennessee)

Ramsey, Sally (Tennessee)

Smith, Deidre (Tennessee)

Williams, Faye A. (Tennessee)

Attorney for Defendant

Backus, Asilia S. (Illinois)

Christlieb, David (Illinois)

Garrett, Timothy K. (Tennessee)

Hult, Keith C. (Illinois)

Wit, Adam C. (Illinois)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Allman, Andy L. (Tennessee)

Holmes, Martin D. (Tennessee)

Rogers, Helen Sfikas (Tennessee)

Shea, Siew-Ling (Tennessee)

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
3:06-cv-00593	Docket [PACER]	June 12, 2012	June 12, 2012 Docket
1 3:06-cv-00593	Complaint	June 9, 2006	June 9, 2006 Complaint
9 3:06-cv-00593	Complaint [Intervenor]	July 24, 2006	July 24, 2006 Complaint
194 3:06-cv-00593	Memorandum Order	Dec. 21, 2009	Dec. 21, 2009 Order/Opinion 2009 WL 4975280
232 3:06-cv-00593	Order	Aug. 2, 2011	Aug. 2, 2011 Order/Opinion 2011 WL 3321291

show / hide documents

Resources

Title	Description		External URL Date / External URL
Under the Radar: Visibility and the Effects of Discrimination Lawsuits in Small and Large Firms Carly Knight, Frank Dobbin, Alexandra Kalev	Research on how discrimination lawsuits affect corporate diversity has yielded mixed results. Qualitative studies highlight the limited efficacy of lawsuits in the typical workplace, finding that lit…	March 2022	April 1, 2022 https://cris.tau.ac.il/...

show / hide resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4788432/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-whirlpool-corporation/

Last updated April 4, 2025, 11:16 a.m.

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	Complaint	June 9, 2006	June 9, 2006
2	Notice of Case Management Conference	June 9, 2006	June 9, 2006
3	Waiver of Service Executed	July 5, 2006	July 5, 2006
4	Motion to Continue 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Granting Motion View on PACER	July 19, 2006	July 19, 2006
5	Order	July 20, 2006	July 20, 2006
6	Motion to Intervene	July 21, 2006	July 21, 2006
7	Memorandum in Support	July 21, 2006	July 21, 2006
8	Order on Motion to Intervene	July 24, 2006	July 24, 2006
9	Intervenor Complaint	July 24, 2006	July 24, 2006
10	Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice 1 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing View on PACER	Aug. 7, 2006	Aug. 7, 2006
11	Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice 1 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing View on PACER	Aug. 7, 2006	Aug. 7, 2006
12	Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice 1 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing View on PACER	Aug. 7, 2006	Aug. 7, 2006
13	Answer to Complaint	Aug. 7, 2006	Aug. 7, 2006
14	Proposed Case Management Order	Aug. 7, 2006	Aug. 7, 2006
15	Business Entity Disclosure Statement	Aug. 7, 2006	Aug. 7, 2006
	Note to Filer re DE #10 & #11: The Certificates of Good Standing should be filed as separate documents rather than as attachments. The "Certificate of Good Standing" event is found under the category "Other Documents". It is not necessary to refile the certificates. (gi, ) (Entered: 08/08/2006)	Aug. 8, 2006	Aug. 8, 2006
	Docket Annotation	Aug. 8, 2006	Aug. 8, 2006
	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Juliet Griffin : Initial Case Management Conference held on 8/10/2006. (Tape #G2006−098.) (jwc, ) (Entered: 08/17/2006)	Aug. 10, 2006	Aug. 10, 2006
	Case Management Conference	Aug. 10, 2006	Aug. 10, 2006
16	Receipt	Aug. 11, 2006	Aug. 11, 2006
17	Receipt	Aug. 11, 2006	Aug. 11, 2006
18	Receipt	Aug. 11, 2006	Aug. 11, 2006
19	Appear Pro Hac Vice	Aug. 14, 2006	Aug. 14, 2006
20	Scheduling Order	Aug. 16, 2006	Aug. 16, 2006
21	Order Setting Case for Trial	Aug. 16, 2006	Aug. 16, 2006
22	Order Reassigning Case	Aug. 16, 2006	Aug. 16, 2006
23	Answer to Intervenor Complaint	Aug. 24, 2006	Aug. 24, 2006
24	Motion to Amend/Correct	Nov. 8, 2006	Nov. 8, 2006
	Note to Filer re DE #24: Each exhibit should be filed as a separate attachment to the main document and the mandatory description field used. It is not necessary to re−file these documents. (gi, ) (Entered: 11/09/2006)	Nov. 9, 2006	Nov. 9, 2006
	Docket Annotation	Nov. 9, 2006	Nov. 9, 2006
25	Order	Nov. 13, 2006	Nov. 13, 2006
26	Response to Motion 1 Exhibit 1-Correspondence to Helen Rogers View on PACER 2 Exhibit 2-Correspondence from Helen Rogers View on PACER 3 Exhibit 3-Correspondence from Helen Rogers View on PACER 4 Exhibit 4-Correspondence to Helen Rogers View on PACER 5 Exhibit 5-Correspondence from Helen Rogers View on PACER	Nov. 13, 2006	Nov. 13, 2006
27	Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery 1 Exhibit A - Order to Extend Scheduling Deadline View on PACER 2 Exhibit B - Backus Letter to Rogers 11-27-06 View on PACER 3 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 1 -15 View on PACER 4 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 16 - 31 View on PACER 5 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 32-45 View on PACER 6 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 46 - 62 View on PACER 7 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 63-79 View on PACER 8 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 80 - 97 View on PACER 9 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 98 - 105 View on PACER 10 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 106 - 119 View on PACER 11 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 120 - 135 View on PACER 12 Exhibit C - Response to RPD Pages 136 - 149 View on PACER 13 Exhibit D - Answers to Interrogatories View on PACER 14 Exhibit E - Backus Letter to Dills and Rogers 11-27-06 View on PACER	Dec. 14, 2006	Dec. 14, 2006
28	Response in Opposition to Motion 1 Exhibit 1-Correspondence View on PACER 2 Exhibit 2-Correspondence View on PACER 3 Exhibit 3-Correspondence View on PACER	Dec. 18, 2006	Dec. 18, 2006
29	Motion to Compel 1 Exhibit Defendants Answers and Objections to Intervening Plaintiffs First Set of View on PACER 2 Exhibit Defendants Responses and Objections to Intervening Plaintiffs First Requ View on PACER 3 Exhibit Collective Exhibit C; Two Letters; dated November 1 and 6, 2006 View on PACER 4 Exhibit Courts Order of December 15, 2006 View on PACER 5 Exhibit Letter of November 27, 2006 View on PACER 6 Exhibit Carlota Freeman's Whirlpool Records View on PACER 7 Exhibit Letter dated December 7, 2006 View on PACER 8 Exhibit Joint Written Statement Pursuant to Local Rule 37.01 View on PACER 9 Exhibit Letter dated December 7, 2006 to Helen S. Rogers from Littler Mendelson View on PACER 10 Exhibit Defendants First Supplemental Answers and Objections to Intervening Plai View on PACER 11 Exhibit Defendants First Supplemental Responses and Objections to Intervening Pl View on PACER	Jan. 24, 2007	Jan. 24, 2007
30	Notice (Other)	Feb. 8, 2007	Feb. 8, 2007
31	Motion to Continue 1 Proposed Order Agreed Order View on PACER	Feb. 9, 2007	Feb. 9, 2007
32	Order on Motion to Continue	Feb. 14, 2007	Feb. 14, 2007
33	Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery	March 2, 2007	March 2, 2007
34	Motion for Protective Order 1 Exhibit 1 View on PACER	March 2, 2007	March 2, 2007
35	Order on Motion for Protective Order	March 13, 2007	March 13, 2007
36	Protective Order	March 13, 2007	March 13, 2007
37	Order	March 15, 2007	March 15, 2007
38	Order on Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery	March 15, 2007	March 15, 2007
	Minute Entry for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Bryant: Telephone conference held on 4/2/2007 re discovery. Order to enter. (tm) (Entered: 04/02/2007)	April 2, 2007	April 2, 2007
	Discovery Hearing	April 2, 2007	April 2, 2007
39	Order	April 3, 2007	April 3, 2007
40	Subpoena	July 13, 2007	July 13, 2007
41	Subpoena	July 13, 2007	July 13, 2007
42	Subpoena	Aug. 7, 2007	Aug. 7, 2007
43	Order on Motion to Compel	Aug. 29, 2007	Aug. 29, 2007
	Emailed a copy of 43 Order to all counsel. (jb) (Entered: 08/30/2007)	Aug. 30, 2007	Aug. 30, 2007
	Docket Annotation	Aug. 30, 2007	Aug. 30, 2007
44	Motion for Miscellaneous Relief 1 Exhibit Deposition Page 50 of Stephen Montgomery, M.D. View on PACER	Aug. 30, 2007	Aug. 30, 2007
	Note to Filer re DE #44−This document has been scanned. Scanning should be used only for documents that are not created on your computer. This document does not need to be re−filed unless otherwise directed by the Court. (jb) (Entered: 08/31/2007)	Aug. 31, 2007	Aug. 31, 2007
	Docket Annotation	Aug. 31, 2007	Aug. 31, 2007
45	Amended Document	Aug. 31, 2007	Aug. 31, 2007
	Note to Filer re DE #45−Pursuant to Rule 5(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, disclosures under Rule 26(a)(1) or (2) must not be filed until they are used in the proceeding or the court orders filing. (jb) (Entered: 09/04/2007)	Sept. 4, 2007	Sept. 4, 2007
	Docket Annotation	Sept. 4, 2007	Sept. 4, 2007
46	Response in Opposition to Motion 1 Exhibit 1-Stephen A. Montgomery, M.D. Deposition Transcript Pages View on PACER	Sept. 11, 2007	Sept. 11, 2007
47	Response to Motion	Sept. 11, 2007	Sept. 11, 2007
	Note to Filer re DE Nos. 48−50 −These documents have been scanned. Scanning should be used only for documents that are not created on your computer. Signed declarations should be filed as separate events, not as attachments to other pleadings. These documents do not need to be re−filed unless otherwise directed by the Court.(jb) (Entered: 09/20/2007)	Sept. 20, 2007	Sept. 20, 2007
	Docket Annotation	Sept. 20, 2007	Sept. 20, 2007
48	Notice of Appearance	Sept. 20, 2007	Sept. 20, 2007
49	Motion in Limine 1 Exhibit Notice of Subpoenaed Deposition View on PACER 2 Exhibit Defendants Amended Rule 26 Initial Disclosures View on PACER 3 Exhibit Declaration of Catina Renea Bolden View on PACER 4 Exhibit Catina Renea Bolden's Prior Statement View on PACER	Sept. 20, 2007	Sept. 20, 2007
50	Memorandum in Support 1 Exhibit Notice of Subpoenaed Deposition View on PACER 2 Exhibit Defendants Amended Rule 26 Initial Disclosure View on PACER 3 Exhibit Declaration of Catina Renea Bolden View on PACER 4 Exhibit Catina Bolden's Prior Statement View on PACER	Sept. 20, 2007	Sept. 20, 2007
51	Motion to Take Deposition 1 Proposed Order Agreed Order Rescheduling Deposition View on PACER	Sept. 21, 2007	Sept. 21, 2007
	AGREED ORDER granting 51 Motion to Take Deposition from Karen L. Carey. The deposition of Karen L. Carey of Liberty Mutual Group−Indianapolis Division, shall be rescheduled to take place by telephone on 9/26/07 at 8:00 a.m., central standard time 3:06-cv-593 As of: 06/08/2017 03:40 PM CDT 6 of 20 zone, at the law offices of Newton Becker Bouwkamp Pendoski, PC, Indianapolis, Indiana. Signed by Judge John S. Bryant on 10/1/07. (jb) (Entered: 10/01/2007)	Oct. 1, 2007	Oct. 1, 2007
52	Order on Motion to Take Deposition	Oct. 1, 2007	Oct. 1, 2007
53	Response in Opposition to Motion 1 Exhibit 1-Sessoms v. Ghertner View on PACER	Oct. 3, 2007	Oct. 3, 2007
54	Memorandum in Support	Oct. 25, 2007	Oct. 25, 2007
	Note to Filer re DE #54−This document has been scanned. Scanning should be used only for documents that are not created on your computer. Each exhibit should be filed as a separate attachment to the main document and the mandatorydescription field used. The mandatory description field should be used to accurately describe the contents of your attachment (labeling as Exhibit A, B C or Exhibit 1, 2, 3 is not sufficient). This document does not need to be re−filed unless otherwise directed by the Court. (jb) (Entered: 10/29/2007)	Oct. 29, 2007	Oct. 29, 2007
	Docket Annotation	Oct. 29, 2007	Oct. 29, 2007
55	Motion to Strike	Nov. 6, 2007	Nov. 6, 2007
56	Memorandum in Support 1 Exhibit 1-Intervening Plaintiff's Amended Rule 26(a)(2) Expert Disclosures View on PACER 2 Exhibit 2-March 14, 2007 Letter View on PACER 3 Exhibit 3-March 19, 2007 Letter View on PACER 4 Exhibit 4-March 22, 2007 Letter View on PACER 5 Exhibit 5-Case View on PACER	Nov. 6, 2007	Nov. 6, 2007
57	Response in Opposition to Motion 1 Exhibit 1-Deposition Transcript Pages View on PACER 2 Exhibit 2-Deposition Transcript Pages View on PACER 3 Exhibit 3-Cases View on PACER	Nov. 8, 2007	Nov. 8, 2007
58	Response in Opposition to Motion 1 Exhibit 1-Excerpt from Dr. Stephen Montgomery's Deposition View on PACER	Nov. 14, 2007	Nov. 14, 2007
	Note to Filer re DE #58−This document has been scanned. Scanning should be used only for documents that are not created on your computer. This document does not need to be re−filed unless otherwise directed by the Court. (jb) (Entered: 11/15/2007)	Nov. 15, 2007	Nov. 15, 2007
	Docket Annotation	Nov. 15, 2007	Nov. 15, 2007
59	Motion for Leave	Nov. 21, 2007	Nov. 21, 2007
60	Order on Motion for Leave	Nov. 27, 2007	Nov. 27, 2007
61	Reply to Response to Motion 1 Exhibit 1-Case View on PACER	Nov. 30, 2007	Nov. 30, 2007
62	Order	Dec. 21, 2007	Dec. 21, 2007
63	Docket Annotation	Dec. 27, 2007	Dec. 27, 2007
64	Order	Jan. 9, 2008	Jan. 9, 2008
65	Motion to Continue 1 Exhibit 1-Order to Set View on PACER	Jan. 14, 2008	Jan. 14, 2008
66	Notice of Appearance	Jan. 16, 2008	Jan. 16, 2008
67	Order	Jan. 25, 2008	Jan. 25, 2008
68	Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery	Feb. 27, 2008	Feb. 27, 2008
	Note to Filer re DE #69−The mandatory description field, for each exhibit filed, should be used to accurately describe the contents of yourattachment (labeling as Exhibit A, B C or Exhibit 1, 2, 3 is not sufficient). This document has been scanned. Scanning should be used only for documents that are not created on your computer. This document does not need to be re−filed unless otherwise directed by the Court. (jb) (Entered: 02/29/2008)	Feb. 29, 2008	Feb. 29, 2008
	Docket Annotation	Feb. 29, 2008	Feb. 29, 2008
69	Response in Opposition to Motion 1 Exhibit View on PACER 2 Exhibit View on PACER	Feb. 29, 2008	Feb. 29, 2008
70	Motion for Discovery 1 Exhibit A - Letter from Whirlpool dated 2-26-08 View on PACER	March 3, 2008	March 3, 2008
71	Memorandum in Support	March 3, 2008	March 3, 2008
72	Motion for Discovery 1 Exhibit Backus Letter of 02-25-08 View on PACER	March 4, 2008	March 4, 2008
73	Memorandum in Support	March 4, 2008	March 4, 2008
74	Motion for Leave	March 5, 2008	March 5, 2008
75	Response in Opposition to Motion 1 Exhibit A-Letter dated March 22, 2007 View on PACER 2 Exhibit B-Letter dated December 12, 2007 View on PACER 3 Exhibit C-Cases View on PACER	March 13, 2008	March 13, 2008
76	Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery	April 14, 2008	April 14, 2008
77	Response in Opposition to Motion 1 Exhibit Deposition of Pam Auble View on PACER 2 Exhibit Deposition of Karen Carey View on PACER	April 18, 2008	April 18, 2008