Case: EEOC v. Courtesy Corporation And Creative Packaging Corp.

1:02-cv-00327 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

Filed Date: Jan. 15, 2002

Closed Date: Oct. 23, 2002

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The Chicago office of the EEOC brought this Title VII suit against Courtesy Corp., a plastic molding company and its packaging affiliate (Creative Packaging Corp.) in January 2002, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The complaint alleges that the defendant engaged in the practice of paying women less for doing substantially the same work as men. The complainant, a female employee intervened in the suit in April 2002, and the parties settled the case in October 2002, by entry of a consent decree.

According to the FY 2003 Office of the General Counsel Annual Report, the consent decree called for the defendant to pay the charging party $110,000 and included anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation provisions. Information on the settlement is scarce because the consent decree is unavailable.

Summary Authors

Kevin Wilemon (5/30/2007)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:02-cv-00327

Docket

Oct. 23, 2002

Oct. 23, 2002

Docket
1

1:02-cv-00327

Complaint

Jan. 15, 2002

Jan. 15, 2002

Complaint

1:02-cv-00327

Office of General Counsel Fiscal Year 2003 Annual Report Statement from the General Counsel

EEOC v. Creative Packaging Corp.

No Court

May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Press Release

Resources

Docket

Last updated Aug. 15, 2022, 3:11 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT; jury demand - Civil cover sheet - Appearance(s) of Jeanne B. Szromba, Noelle Christine Brennan, John C. Hendrickson as attorney(s) for plaintiff (No summons(es) issued.) ( Documents: 1-1 through 1-3) (hp) (Entered: 01/15/2002)

Jan. 15, 2002

Jan. 15, 2002

SCHEDULE set on 1/22/02 by Hon. Ronald A. Guzman : Status hearing set to 9:30 3/15/02 . All parties shall refer to and comply with Judge Guzman's requirements for the initial appearance as outlined in Judge Guzman's case management procedures, which can be found at: www.ilnd.uscourts.gov. The parties shall deliver a copy of the initial status report to the Courtroom Deputy (Room 1218) three business days before the initial status hearing Mailed notice (cjg) (Entered: 01/22/2002)

Jan. 22, 2002

Jan. 22, 2002

2

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Joan E. Gale, Alysa Miriam Barancik (eav) (Entered: 01/24/2002)

Jan. 23, 2002

Jan. 23, 2002

3

WAIVER of service of summons as to Courtesy Corp, Creative Pkg Corp sent on 1/15/02 (rmm) (Entered: 01/31/2002)

Jan. 30, 2002

Jan. 30, 2002

4

ANSWER by defendants to plaintiff's complaint [1-1]. (ntf) (Entered: 03/14/2002)

March 13, 2002

March 13, 2002

8

JOINT PROPOSESD DISCOVERY plan by plaintiff and defendants (rmm) (Entered: 04/25/2002)

March 21, 2002

March 21, 2002

SCHEDULE set on 3/22/02 by Hon. Ronald A. Guzman : Status hearing reset to 9:30 4/3/02 . Mailed notice (cjg) (Entered: 03/22/2002)

March 22, 2002

March 22, 2002

SCHEDULE set on 4/3/02 by Hon. Ronald A. Guzman : Status hearing held and continued to 9:30 11/6/02 . In court notice (cjg) (Entered: 04/03/2002)

April 3, 2002

April 3, 2002

6

MOTION by Plaintiff-intervenor Dawn Weiner to intervene ; Notice (rmm) (Entered: 04/19/2002)

April 11, 2002

April 11, 2002

5

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for Dawn Weiner by Aaron Benjamin Maduff, Deanne Snedeker Medina; Notice (rmm) (Entered: 04/16/2002)

April 15, 2002

April 15, 2002

7

MINUTE ORDER of 4/16/02 by Hon. Ronald A. Guzman: Motion of Dawn Weiner to intervene as plaintiff-Intervenor is granted [6-1]. No notice (rmm) (Entered: 04/19/2002)

April 16, 2002

April 16, 2002

9

MOTION by plaintiff to quash subpoena ; Memorandum in support (Attachments); Notice (rmm) (Entered: 06/28/2002)

June 24, 2002

June 24, 2002

10

MOTION by defendants to enforce records subpoenas (Attachments): Notice (rmm) (Entered: 06/28/2002)

June 24, 2002

June 24, 2002

11

MINUTE ORDER of 6/27/02 by Hon. Ronald A. Guzman: Defendnats' motion to enforce records subpoenas [10-1] is granted in part. Plaintiff's motion to quash subpoena is denied [9-1]. No notice (rmm) (Entered: 06/28/2002)

June 27, 2002

June 27, 2002

13

AGREED MOTION by plaintiff EEOC and defendants Courtesy Corp, and Creative Pkg Corp for entry of consent decree ; Notice (rmm) (Entered: 10/28/2002)

Oct. 21, 2002

Oct. 21, 2002

14

MINUTE ORDER of 10/23/02 by Hon. Ronald A. Guzman: Agreed motion for entry of consent decree is granted [13-1] . Status hearing date of 11/5/02 is stricken. (Entered consent decree.) Terminating case. Mailed notice (rmm) (Entered: 10/28/2002)

Oct. 23, 2002

Oct. 23, 2002

Case Details

State / Territory: Illinois

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Jan. 15, 2002

Closing Date: Oct. 23, 2002

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.

Plaintiff Type(s):

EEOC Plaintiff

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Creative Packaging Corp. (Buffalo Grove, IL), Private Entity/Person

Courtesy Corporation (Buffalo Grove, IL), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C. § 206(d)

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

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

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

Amount Defendant Pays: 110000

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Retaliation Prohibition

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Retaliation

Discrimination-area:

Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff

Pay / Benefits

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits

Private Party intervened in EEOC suit