Case: EEOC v. HI-MILL MANUFACTURING, INC.

2:03-cv-73670 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Filed Date: Sept. 24, 2003

Closed Date: 2007

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The EEOC's Detroit Office sued Hi-Mill Manufacturing, a Michigan company, on September 24, 2003 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The EEOC's complaint alleged that Hi-Mill violated Title VII and the Equal Pay Act when it discriminated based on sex (female) by paying at least two female employees less than their male counterparts for equally situated occupations. The court entered a consent decree on June 30, 2004 which required Hi-Mill to pay $20,000 to the two female employees, adjust the wages of the two female employees to reflect the standard payment in their occupation. Furthermore, Hi-Mill was required to end their discriminatory practices generally, forego retaliation, train their upper management about the Equal Pay Act, and post a notice of compliance with Title VII.

The decree was entered in 2004 and scheduled to last 2007. No further docket entries exist, so the case is closed.

Summary Authors

Aaron Weismann (6/1/2007)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:03-cv-73670

Docket [PACER]

EEOC v. Hi-Hill Manufacturing, Inc.

June 30, 2004

June 30, 2004

Docket
1

2:03-cv-73670

Complaint

EEOC v. Hi-Hill Manufacturing, Inc.

Sept. 24, 2003

Sept. 24, 2003

Complaint
7

2:03-cv-73670

Consent Decree

EEOC v. Hi-Hill Manufacturing, Inc.

June 30, 2004

June 30, 2004

Settlement Agreement

Resources

Docket

Last updated June 1, 2022, 3:15 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT with jury demand (LS) (Entered: 09/25/2003)

Sept. 24, 2003

Sept. 24, 2003

2

ANSWER by defendant Hi Mill Mfg to complaint [1-1] with proof of service (kg) (Entered: 10/16/2003)

Oct. 14, 2003

Oct. 14, 2003

2

AFFIRMATIVE defenses by defendant Hi Mill Mfg (kg) (Entered: 10/16/2003)

Oct. 14, 2003

Oct. 14, 2003

3

NOTICE by court setting scheduling conference for 4:00 on 12/2/03 with proof of service (kg) (Entered: 10/21/2003)

Oct. 20, 2003

Oct. 20, 2003

SCHEDULING conference held - Judge Denise Page Hood (bl) (Entered: 12/02/2003)

Dec. 2, 2003

Dec. 2, 2003

4

PRETRIAL scheduling order by Judge Denise Page Hood - setting deadline for witness list for 2/16/04 , setting deadline for discovery for 5/3/04 , setting deadline for filing motions for 5/17/04 , setting final pretrial conference for 2:00 7/19/04 , setting civil jury trial for 9:00 9/21/04 (kg) (Entered: 12/11/2003)

Dec. 10, 2003

Dec. 10, 2003

5

WITNESS LIST by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (LHack, ) (Entered: 02/18/2004)

Feb. 12, 2004

Feb. 12, 2004

6

WITNESS LIST by Hi-Mill Manufacturing (LHack, ) (Entered: 02/20/2004)

Feb. 13, 2004

Feb. 13, 2004

7

CONSENT DECREE Signed by Honorable Denise Page Hood. (SSchoe, ) (Entered: 07/02/2004)

June 30, 2004

June 30, 2004

Case Details

State / Territory: Michigan

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 24, 2003

Closing Date: 2007

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

Hi-Mill Manufacturing (Highland, Michigan), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Monetary Relief

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

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: 20000

Order Duration: 2004 - 2007

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Reporting

Retaliation Prohibition

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Provide antidiscrimination training

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination-area:

Pay / Benefits

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits