Case: EEOC v. DIGITAL CONNECTIONS, INC.

3:05-cv-00710 | U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee

Filed Date: Sept. 13, 2005

Closed Date: 2009

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On September 13, 2005, the Memphis office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against Digital Connections, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. The EEOC claimed that the defendants had violated the rights of the complainant by retaliating against her for filing an earlier complaint with the EEOC regarding a former employer.On June 30, 2006, the defendant filed for summary judgment, claiming that judicial estoppel shoul…
On September 13, 2005, the Memphis office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a lawsuit under Title VII against Digital Connections, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. The EEOC claimed that the defendants had violated the rights of the complainant by retaliating against her for filing an earlier complaint with the EEOC regarding a former employer.On June 30, 2006, the defendant filed for summary judgment, claiming that judicial estoppel should prevent the EEOC from being able to bring this lawsuit. On September 26, 2006, the district court issued an opinion denying the motion for summary judgment. On October 15, 2006, the parties reached a settlement, which the district court adopted as a consent decree on December 12, 2006. Under the consent decree, the defendants agreed to pay the complainant $20,000 in damages in monthly installments of $2000. The decree enjoined the defendants from discriminating or retaliating against any employee for filing a complaint with the EEOC. The defendants agreed to provide employment discrimination awareness training to all employees, including at least 2 hours of instruction on the topics of discrimination and retaliation. The training was to be conducted by an agreed-upon outside party. Within 30 days of the consent decree's ratification by the court, the defendant was to provide the court with the training schedule, and the training was to occur within 90 days of the court's adoption of the consent decree. The settlement term was 3 years. The docket sheet does not show any further enforcement; the case was presumably closed in 2009.

Summary Authors

Justin Kanter (2/14/2008)

Clearinghouse (6/12/2017)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4660359/parties/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-digital-connections-inc/


Judge(s)

Echols, Robert L. (Tennessee)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

3:05-cv-00710

Docket [PACER]

EEOC v. Digital Connections, Inc.

Dec. 12, 2006

Dec. 12, 2006

Docket
1

3:05-cv-00710

Complaint

EEOC v. Digital Connections, Inc.

Sept. 13, 2005

Sept. 13, 2005

Complaint
39

3:05-cv-00710

Memorandum [& Opinion]

EEOC v. Digital Connections, Inc.

Sept. 26, 2006

Sept. 26, 2006

Order/Opinion

2006 WL 2792217

47

3:05-cv-00710

Consent Decree

EEOC v. Digital Connections, Inc.

Dec. 12, 2006

Dec. 12, 2006

Settlement Agreement

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4660359/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-digital-connections-inc/

Last updated Aug. 18, 2025, 12:27 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
39

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. Signed by Judge Robert Echols on 9/26/06. (dt)

Sept. 26, 2006

Sept. 26, 2006

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Tennessee

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 13, 2005

Closing Date: 2009

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

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

Plaintiff Type(s):

EEOC Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Digital Connections, Inc. (Hendersonville), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

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

Retaliation Prohibition

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Provide antidiscrimination training

Amount Defendant Pays: 20000

Order Duration: 2006 - 2009

Issues

General/Misc.:

Retaliation

Discrimination Area:

Disparate Treatment

Hiring

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits