Case: EEOC v. SNACK VENDING COMPANY INC

4:98-cv-00834 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas

Filed Date: Dec. 21, 1998

Closed Date: May 15, 2007

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The Memphis and Little Rock Offices of the EEOC filed this action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas. The Defendant was Snack Vending Company, Inc., a provider of vending machines. The controversy involved the alleged discriminatory practices of the Defendant in hiring practices toward black applicants, as well as constructively discharging the complainant. The lawsuit was filed in December 1998 and was eventually resolved by consent decree in May of 2000. The complainant, who intervened in the case, was awarded $26,500. The company had to pay an additional $110,000 to "other identified victims of discrimination." In addition, rigorous reporting and recordkeeping requirements were imposed for the duration of the decree, which was to last for seven years.

The decree was entered in May 2000 and scheduled to last until May 2007. No further docket entries exist, so the case is closed.

Summary Authors

Kevin Wilemon (6/30/2007)

Clearinghouse (11/25/2018)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

	Document
4:98-cv-00834	Docket (PACER) EEOC v. Snack Vending Company, Inc.	May 15, 2000	May 15, 2000 Docket
1 4:98-cv-00834	Complaint EEOC v. Snack Vending Company, Inc.	Dec. 21, 1998	Dec. 21, 1998 Complaint
17 4:98-cv-00834	Complaint in Intervention EEOC v. Snack Vending Company, Inc.	Feb. 14, 2000	Feb. 14, 2000 Complaint
21 4:98-cv-00834	Consent Decree EEOC v. Snack Vending Company, Inc.	May 15, 2000	May 15, 2000 Order/Opinion

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…	April 1, 2022	April 1, 2022 https://cris.tau.ac.il/...

show / hide resources

Docket

Last updated March 24, 2024, 3:11 a.m.

ECF Number	Description	Date	Link Date / Link
1	COMPLAINT w/jury demand; no summons issued (former empl) (Entered: 12/21/1998)	Dec. 21, 1998	Dec. 21, 1998
2	FIRST REQUEST by plaintiff for Admissions (vjt) (Entered: 01/08/1999)	Jan. 7, 1999	Jan. 7, 1999
3	RESPONSE by deft to requests for admission [2-1] (vjt) (Entered: 02/01/1999)	Jan. 29, 1999	Jan. 29, 1999
4	ANSWER by defendant (vjt) (Entered: 02/01/1999)	Jan. 29, 1999	Jan. 29, 1999
6	MOTION by defendant to strike class allegations (bmt) (Entered: 03/31/1999)	March 30, 1999	March 30, 1999
7	BRIEF by defendant in support of motion to strike class allegations [6-1] (bmt) (Entered: 03/31/1999)	March 30, 1999	March 30, 1999
8	STATEMENT by plaintiff in opposition to motion to strike class allegations [6-1] (bmt) (Entered: 04/12/1999)	April 12, 1999	April 12, 1999
9	NOTICE by defendant of taking deposition of Robert Storay and Margaret Dudash on 6/8/99 (bmt) (Entered: 04/28/1999)	April 28, 1999	April 28, 1999
10	SCHEDULING ORDER (DOC); jury trial set for 9:30 5/15/00 in Little Rock; discovery due 3/30/00; pretrial info sheet due 4/17/00 (cc: all counsel) (bmt) (Entered: 11/03/1999)	Nov. 2, 1999	Nov. 2, 1999
11	MOTION by movant Robert Storay to intervene (bmt) (Entered: 12/07/1999)	Dec. 6, 1999	Dec. 6, 1999
12	RESPONSE by defendant to motion to intervene [11-1] (bmt) (Entered: 12/29/1999)	Dec. 28, 1999	Dec. 28, 1999
13	REPLY brief by movant Robert Storay in support of motion to intervene [11-1] (bmt) (Entered: 01/12/2000)	Jan. 11, 2000	Jan. 11, 2000
14	ORDER by Judge Stephen M. Reasoner granting motion to intervene of Robert Storay [11-1] (cc: all counsel) (bmt) (Entered: 01/26/2000)	Jan. 26, 2000	Jan. 26, 2000
15	ORDER by Judge Stephen M. Reasoner denying motion to strike class allegations [6-1] (cc: all counsel) lej) (Entered: 02/04/2000)	Feb. 3, 2000	Feb. 3, 2000
16	ANSWER by defendant to complaint in intervention lej) (Entered: 02/10/2000)	Feb. 9, 2000	Feb. 9, 2000
17	COMPLAINT in intervention by intervenor plaintiff lej) (Entered: 02/14/2000)	Feb. 14, 2000	Feb. 14, 2000
18	MOTION by defendant to continue trial lej) (Entered: 02/24/2000)	Feb. 24, 2000	Feb. 24, 2000
19	NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff by Pamela B Dixon (bmt) (Entered: 03/01/2000)	Feb. 29, 2000	Feb. 29, 2000
20	SCHEDULING ORDER (DOC) granting motion to continue trial [18-1]; jury trial continued until 9:30 8/28/00 in Little Rock; discovery cutoff extended to 7/3/00; pretrial info sheet due by 7/31/00 (cc: all counsel) (bmt) (Entered: 05/10/2000)	May 9, 2000	May 9, 2000
21	CONSENT DECREE: by Judge Stephen M. Reasoner parties have agreed to settle all claims involved in case; deft and its supervisors, managers, officers, directors, agents, and successors are enjoined from discriminating against employees because of their race; w/in 30 days after entry of this decree, deft will pay to Robert Storay $6,150.00 in atty's fees and $20,000.00 in back pay, less normal payroll tax deductions; also w/in 30 days after the entry of this decree, deft will pay a total of $110,000.00 in back pay, less normal payroll tax deductions to the other identified victims of discrimination in accordance with instruction from the Commission concerning who will be paid and how much in back pay each person will be paid; parties will each bear their own attys' fees and	May 15, 2000	May 15, 2000