Case: EEOC v. Autozone

2:00-cv-02923 | U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee

Filed Date: Sept. 29, 2000

Closed Date: March 24, 2009

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The Memphis and Washington D.C. offices of the EEOC brought suit against Autozone, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee in September 2000. While we do not have a copy of the complaint, it seems the complaint alleged that Autozone, Inc. engaged in a pattern or practice of race and gender discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. More specifically, the defendant allegedly discriminated against females and Blacks in hiring and prom…

The Memphis and Washington D.C. offices of the EEOC brought suit against Autozone, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee in September 2000. While we do not have a copy of the complaint, it seems the complaint alleged that Autozone, Inc. engaged in a pattern or practice of race and gender discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. More specifically, the defendant allegedly discriminated against females and Blacks in hiring and promoting. The Court dismissed the pattern or practice claims of failure to hire female applicants for technician positions and failure to promote Black employees to official/manager positions on May 16, 2005 and July 7, 2005, respectively. An intervenor plaintiff was allowed to enter the suit, but her claim was subsequently dismissed in July 2005.

The defendant, Autozone, filed a motion for summary judgment on July 8, 2005. Judge Samuel Mays of the District Court granted in part and denied in part this motion for summary judgment on August 29, 2006. Judge Mays granted the motion with regard to the EEOC's claims for a pattern or practice of disparate treatment and disparate impact but denied with regard to the EEOC's claims for individual disparate treatment and failure to comply with the record keeping requirements of Title VII. EEOC v. Autozone, Inc., No. Civ. 00-2923, 2006 WL 2524093.

Henceforth, the EEOC pursued individual discrimination claims alleging failure to promote Black employees into official/manager positions. Autozone, Inc. subsequently filed a motion for summary judgment which was granted in part and denied in part by Judge Mays on August 13, 2007. Specifically, Autozone's motion was granted as to the EEOC's failure-to-promote claims on behalf of nine employees and the EEOC's failure-to-hire claims on behalf of twelve applicants; Autozone's motion for summary judgment as to the EEOC's failure-to-hire claims on behalf of five applicants was denied.

With two claimants remaining in the case with failure-to-hire claims, the Court held a bench trial from August 18, 2008 to August 20, 2008. In a memorandum of opinion, Judge Mays discussed his findings of facts and law and found in favor of the defendant, Autozone. Judge Mays concluded that the EEOC failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Autozone's stated non-discriminatory reasons for hiring males over the two female plaintiffs remaining in this case were a pretext for gender discrimination. Therefore, the EEOC failed to prove that Autozone discriminated against the two remaining plaintiffs. Judge Mays entered the judgment on March 24, 2009. This case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Justin Kanter (6/2/2008)

Mackenzie Walz (3/24/2018)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4639775/parties/eeoc-v-autozone-inc/


Judge(s)

Bryant, Edward G. (Tennessee)

Mays, Samuel H. Jr. (Tennessee)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bannon, Jeffrey (Tennessee)

Beck, Terry (Tennessee)

Borek, Thomas J. (Tennessee)

Kores, Katharine W. (Tennessee)

Krupicka, Lisa (Tennessee)

Liner, Celia S. (Tennessee)

Rapport, Adele (Tennessee)

Reams, Gwendolyn Young (Tennessee)

Judge(s)

Bryant, Edward G. (Tennessee)

Mays, Samuel H. Jr. (Tennessee)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Bannon, Jeffrey (Tennessee)

Beck, Terry (Tennessee)

Borek, Thomas J. (Tennessee)

Kores, Katharine W. (Tennessee)

Krupicka, Lisa (Tennessee)

Liner, Celia S. (Tennessee)

Rapport, Adele (Tennessee)

Reams, Gwendolyn Young (Tennessee)

Smith, Deidre (Tennessee)

Stewart, C. Gregory (District of Columbia)

Williams, Faye A. (Tennessee)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Christy, Walter W (Louisiana)

Ehret, Leslie Weill (Louisiana)

Feibelman, Jef (Tennessee)

Gottsegen, Thomas E. (Louisiana)

Kern, Tracy E (Louisiana)

Kovach, Ellen Shirer (Louisiana)

West, Madeline Doucet (Louisiana)

Other Attorney(s)

Donati, Donald A. (Tennessee)

Kriegel, Reva M. (Tennessee)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

EEOC v. Autozone Inc

Sept. 3, 2013 Docket
137

Order Denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Laches, Denying Defendant's Motion to Limit the Temporal Scope, and Denying Defendant's Motion to Limit Monetary Relief

EEOC v. Autozone Inc

258 F.Supp.2d 822

March 31, 2003 Order/Opinion
221

Order Denying [Defendant's] Motion for Protective Order and to Quash

EEOC v. Autozone Inc

2005 WL 8156700

Feb. 16, 2005 Order/Opinion
230

Agreed Order Dismissing Plaintiff EEOC's Claim Concerning Failure to Hire Female Technicians

EEOC v. Autozone Inc

May 16, 2005 Order/Opinion
245

Order Dismissing Action of Intervening Plaintiff Constance Amos

EEOC v. Autozone Inc

July 6, 2005 Order/Opinion
244

Order Dismissing Plaintiff EEOC's Pattern or Practice Claim Concerning Failure to Promote African Americans into Official/Manager Positions

EEOC v. Autozone Inc

July 7, 2005 Order/Opinion
290

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment

EEOC v. Autozone Inc

2006 WL 2524093, 2006 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 61784

Aug. 29, 2006 Order/Opinion
320

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment

EEOC v. Autozone Inc

Aug. 13, 2007 Order/Opinion
380

Memorandum Opinion Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

EEOC v Autozone, Inc.

2009 WL 778986

March 20, 2009 Order/Opinion

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4639775/eeoc-v-autozone-inc/

Last updated May 11, 2022, 8 p.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT (Summons(es)NOT issued) ; Filing fee $ waived (WBE) (Entered: 10/02/2000)

Sept. 29, 2000 PACER
2

SETTING LETTER ; scheduling conference set for 8:30 12/6/00 (EHG) (Entered: 10/17/2000)

Oct. 17, 2000 PACER
3

WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS by defendant Autozone, Inc. (EHG) (Entered: 11/03/2000)

Nov. 3, 2000 PACER
4

MOTION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE by defendant Autozone, Inc. for attorney Walter W. Christy, Leslie W. Ehret, Tracy K. Hidalgo, Thomas E. Gottsegen to appear pro hac vice (EHG) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 13, 2000 PACER
5

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. to continue scheduling conference (..set for 12/6/00) (EHG) (Entered: 11/14/2000)

Nov. 13, 2000 PACER
6

ORDER by Judge Jon P. McCalla granting dft's motion to continue scheduling conference (..set for 12/6/00) [5-1] ; scheduling conference continued to 12/1/00 @ 8:30 a.m. (cc: all counsel) (EHG) (Entered: 11/15/2000)

Nov. 14, 2000 PACER
7

ORDER by Judge Jon P. McCalla granting defendant, Autozone, Inc., motion for attorney Walter W. Christy, Leslie W. Ehret, Tracy K. Hidalgo, Thomas E. Gottsegen to appear pro hac vice [4-1] (cc: all counsel) (EHG) (Entered: 11/15/2000)

Nov. 14, 2000 PACER
8

ANSWER by defendant Autozone, Inc. to [1-1] (EHG) (Entered: 11/15/2000)

Nov. 14, 2000 PACER
9

NOTICE OF FILING: REPORT OF PARTIES' PLANNING MEETING by plaintiff EEOC, defendant Autozone, Inc. (EHG) (Entered: 11/28/2000)

Nov. 27, 2000 PACER
10

NOTICE OF ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant Autozone, Inc. by Lisa A. Krupicka (EHG) (Entered: 12/04/2000)

Nov. 30, 2000 PACER
12

MINUTES: Rule 16(b) Conf 12/1/00. Plaintiff's experts ddl 11/1/01; dfts experts ddl 1/1/02. Walter Christy and Jef Feibelman will not be allowed to participate as lead counsel in this case. Autozone will define categories of job descriptions to EEOC by Fri., 12/22/00 (80-85% of the information) with the remainder due by Fri., 12/29/00. Dft's motion to determine the temporal scope of litigation or to limit the scope of discoery is due by 12/15/00; pla's response is ude by 12/28/00. The scheduling conf is continued to Thursday, 12/28/00 @ 2:00 p.m. Presiding Judge: McCalla PLA Atty: Celia Liner, Deidra Liner DFT Atty: Lisa Krupicka, Leslie Ehret C/R: Brenda Parker (EHG) (Entered: 12/04/2000)

Dec. 1, 2000 PACER
11

SETTING LETTER ; scheduling conference set for 2:00 12/28/00 (EHG) (Entered: 12/04/2000)

Dec. 4, 2000 PACER
13

TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 12/1/00 of Scheduling Conference Volumes 1 Court Reporter: Brenda Parker [document placed in separate folder] (EHG) (Entered: 12/05/2000)

Dec. 5, 2000 PACER
14

ORDER FOLLOWING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE.. by Judge Jon P. McCalla ...(1) dft shall produce information relating to the job categories at issue in this case by 12/22/00. (2) The parties shall submit briefs on the question of the applicable time period covered by this lawsuit..Dft shall submit its brief by 12/15/00. Pla shall submit its response by 12/28/00. (3) Pla shall submit a first supplement to its 26(a)(1) disclosures by 12/18/00. ... ;(4) a follow-up conference set for 2:00 12/28/00 (cc: all counsel) (EHG) (Entered: 12/07/2000)

Dec. 6, 2000 PACER
15

ORDER OF RECUSAL by Judge Jon P. McCalla: The Court hereby recuses itself in this matter and returns the file to the Clerk of Court for reassignment. Case reassigned to Chief Judge Julia S. Gibbons (cc: all counsel) (EHG) (Entered: 12/14/2000)

Dec. 13, 2000 PACER
16

NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT... from Judge McCalla to Judge Gibbons. (cc: all counsel) (EHG) (Entered: 12/14/2000)

Dec. 14, 2000 PACER
17

SETTING LETTER ; scheduling conference set for 9:00 1/10/01 (EHG) (Entered: 12/22/2000)

Dec. 22, 2000 PACER
18

MINUTES: ; scheduling conference satisfied 9:00 1/10/01. Scheduling order to enter. Schedule set as follows: join parties 2/01/01; amend pleadings 2/01/01; discovery 3/01/02; pla experts 11/01/01; dft experts 1/01/02; dispositive/sumjgm motions 5/01/02; jury trial 8/19/02; est trial length 10 days; Another scheduling conf toward end of year to discuss possibility of settlement. Presiding Judge: Gibbons PLA Atty: Deidre Smith, Celia Liner DFT Atty: Walter Christy, Allison Smith, Jef Feibelman C/R: Mark Dodson (EHG) (Entered: 01/12/2001)

Jan. 10, 2001 PACER
60

RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION by plaintiff EEOC to motion to reopen and extend deadline for amending the pleadings (filed w/ exhibits 1-4)[53-1] (PWM) (Entered: 11/14/2001)

Jan. 13, 2001 PACER
19

RULE 16(b) SCHEDULING ORDER Judge Julia S. Gibbons ; ...ddl for amending pleadings and to join additional parties 2/1/01; discovery 3/1/01; pla's expert disclosures 11/1/01; dft's expert disclousres 1/1/02; ddl for filing potentially dispositive motions 5/1/02; case set for trial 8/19/02; trial will take 10 days. Another scheduling conf will be set toward the end of 2001 to discuss the possibility of settlement. (cc: all counsel) (EHG) (Entered: 01/24/2001)

Jan. 23, 2001 PACER
20

ORDER AMENDING SCHEDULING ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons discovery ddl set 3/1/02 (cc: all counsel) (EHG) (Entered: 02/05/2001)

Feb. 5, 2001 PACER
21

SETTING LETTER:status conference set for 11/21/01 at 9:00 Courtroom 1 11th flr. (PWM) (Entered: 05/08/2001)

May 7, 2001 PACER
22

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC for special admission to participate in a particular case to allow Thomas J. Borek to appear on behalf of pla EEOC (PWM) (Entered: 06/04/2001)

June 1, 2001 PACER
23

ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons granting motion for special admission to participate in a particular case to allow Thomas J. Borek to appear on behalf of pla EEOC [22-1] (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 06/06/2001)

June 4, 2001 PACER
24

MOTION by intervenor plaintiff Constance Amos to intervene (PWM) (Entered: 06/29/2001)

June 28, 2001 PACER
25

MEMORANDUM by intervenor plaintiff Constance Amos in support of motion to intervene [24-1] (PWM) (Entered: 06/29/2001)

June 28, 2001 PACER
26

ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons granting motion to intervene [24-1] For good cause shown, the motion is granted.(cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 07/06/2001)

July 3, 2001 PACER
27

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. to substitute attorney Thomas E. Gottsegen for Madeline D. West (PWM) (Entered: 07/09/2001)

July 9, 2001 PACER
28

ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons granting motion to substitute attorney Madeline D. West for Thomas E. Gottsegen [27-1], for dft AutoZone, Inc.; substituting attorney Madeline D. West for Thomas E. Gottsegen; (cc: all counsel) (BAG) (Entered: 07/12/2001)

July 10, 2001 PACER
29

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. for attorney Madeline Doucet West to appear pro hac vice (PWM) (Entered: 07/18/2001)

July 17, 2001 PACER
30

ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons granting motion for attorney Madeline Doucet West to appear pro hac vice for dft Autozone [29-1] (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 07/19/2001)

July 19, 2001 PACER
31

TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 8/20/01 of In-Chambers Conference Volumes 1 Court Reporter: Mark Dodson ( documents placed in seperate folder) (PWM) (Entered: 08/22/2001)

Aug. 22, 2001 PACER
32

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC to recuse Judge Gibbons from this case (PWM) (Entered: 08/28/2001)

Aug. 27, 2001 PACER
33

MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion to recuse Judge Gibbons from this case [32-1] (PWM) (Entered: 08/28/2001)

Aug. 27, 2001 PACER
34

RESPONSE by intervenor plaintiff Constance Amos to motion to recuse Judge Gibbons from this case [32-1] (PWM) (Entered: 09/07/2001)

Sept. 5, 2001 PACER
35

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in opposition to motion to recuse Judge Gibbons from this case [32-1] (PWM) (Entered: 09/12/2001)

Sept. 11, 2001 PACER
36

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in opposition to pla's motion requesting Judge Gibbons recuse herslf from this case[35-1] (PWM) (Entered: 09/12/2001)

Sept. 11, 2001 PACER
37

MINUTES: for Type of hearing held: Chambers Conference Discussion re Motion to recuse. Court will reule as soon as possible trial date 9/16/02. Presiding Judge: J. Gibbons PLA Atty: T.Beck & T. DFT Atty: Feibelman, Krupicka, Donati, Kriegel, Christy, Smith C/R: Mark Dodson (PWM) (Entered: 09/17/2001)

Sept. 11, 2001 PACER
38

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC for protective order (PWM) (Entered: 09/28/2001)

Sept. 27, 2001 PACER
39

MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion for protective order [38-1] (filed with exhibits 1-4) (PWM) Modified on 09/28/2001 (Entered: 09/28/2001)

Sept. 27, 2001 PACER
40

ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons denying motion to recuse Judge Gibbons from this case [32-1]..... While the court will not transfer the case at the present time, the court will nevertheless likely transfer the case to a visiting judge, many of who will be assisting in the district, at an appropriate future tiem. That course will assure that the judge's identity is not ultimately an issue in the case, yet will avoid giving a single party or the newspaper control over the choice of a judge. In terms of the timing of any transfer, the court notes that his case has been pending a full yr & has been before this judge for some nine months. Other than the signing of routine orders, only 2 things requiring judicial attention have occurred- setting a schedule for progress of the case and resolving this-media-generated recusal issue. That trend appears likely to continue, and there will be ample time to determine who is available to assist w/ this matter after a full schedule for visiting judges is established. (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 10/01/2001)

Sept. 28, 2001 PACER
41

ORDER OF REFERENCE by Judge Julia S. Gibbons referring to Mag Judge J. D. Breen the motion for protective order [38-1] This matter is hereby referred to the US Mag Judge for a detmerination. Any exceptions to the mag judge's order shall be made by motion w/n 10 days of order. (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 10/03/2001)

Oct. 2, 2001 PACER
42

SETTING LETTER: hearing on pla's motion for a protective order has been set for 10/10/01 at 10:00, before Mag Judge Breen; (BAG) (Entered: 10/09/2001)

Oct. 9, 2001 PACER
43

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in opposition to the EEOC'S motion for protective order [38-1] (filed w/ Exhibit 1) (PWM) Modified on 10/10/2001 (Entered: 10/10/2001)

Oct. 9, 2001 PACER
44

SUPPLEMENT DECLARATION OF CELIA S. LINER by plaintiff EEOC re motion for protective order [38-1] (PWM) (Entered: 10/10/2001)

Oct. 10, 2001 PACER
45

MINUTES: denying motion for protective order [38-1] Type of hearing held: Motion Hearing - Court requires pla to produce investigator to be available for discovery; Court will withhold ruling on damages until after experts disclosure 11/01/01; Dft may not depose any EEOC lawyers; Pla may file motion to bifurcate discovery/trial. Presiding Judge: J. PLA Atty: C. Liner & D. Smith DFT Atty: W. Christy & A. Smith C/R: Brenda Parker (PWM) (Entered: 10/19/2001)

Oct. 10, 2001 PACER
46

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC to bifurcate the issues of liability and individual relief during the trial of this case & to bifourcate the discovery in this case. (PWM) (Entered: 10/23/2001)

Oct. 22, 2001 PACER
47

MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion to bifurcate the issues of liability and individual relief during the trial of this case & to bifourcate the discovery in this case. [46-1] (PWM) (Entered: 10/23/2001)

Oct. 22, 2001 PACER
48

ORDER by Mag Judge J. D. Breen denying motion for protective order [38-1].... As to informaotin regarding the facts and methodology underlying the EEOC's statistics adn computaiton of damages, the court was advised that the EEOC will be revealing its epert witness list, as well as providing Rule 26(a) expert reports, on or before 11/1/01. At that point, the dft would e in a position to determine which, if any of the experts it would intend to depose concerning the statistics and computation of damages. Once all of eh depositions described herein have been completed, the court may revisit the issue as to whether the dft would be entitlted to take the deposition of the pla's counsel concerning the EEOC's investigation leading up to the filing of these charges, as well as any additional investigation that has been undertaken concerning alleged ongoing discrimination by dft. (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 10/23/2001)

Oct. 23, 2001 PACER
49

TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 1/10/01 of Proceedings before Julia Gibbon Volumes 1 Court Reporter: Mark Dodson (documents placed under seperate folder) (PWM) (Entered: 10/24/2001)

Oct. 24, 2001 PACER
50

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC for leave to modify the rule 16(b) scheduling order (PWM) (Entered: 10/29/2001)

Oct. 26, 2001 PACER
51

MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion for leave to modify the rule 16(b) scheduling order (filed w/ exhibits 1-5 & proposed order) [50-1] (PWM) (Entered: 10/29/2001)

Oct. 26, 2001 PACER
52

CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION by plaintiff EEOC (PWM) (Entered: 10/29/2001)

Oct. 26, 2001 PACER
53

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. to reopen and extend deadline for amending the pleadings (PWM) (Entered: 10/30/2001)

Oct. 29, 2001 PACER
54

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. to extend time to file dft's opposition to the EEOC's motion for bifurcated trial and bifurcated discovery (PWM) (Entered: 11/05/2001)

Nov. 2, 2001 PACER
55

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in support of motion to extend time to file dft's opposition to the EEOC's motion for bifurcated trial and bifurcated discovery [54-1] (PWM) (Entered: 11/05/2001)

Nov. 2, 2001 PACER
56

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. for attorney Ellen Shirer Kovach to appear pro hac vice (PWM) (Entered: 11/06/2001)

Nov. 5, 2001 PACER
57

ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons granting motion to extend time to file dft's opposition to the EEOC's motion for bifurcated trial and bifurcated discovery [54-1] Dft AutoZone, Inc., is hereby granted until 11/16/01, to file its opposition to pla EEOC's motion to Bifurcate the Issues of Liability and Individual Relief During the Trial of this case and to Bifurcate the Discovery in this case (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 11/07/2001)

Nov. 7, 2001 PACER
58

ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons granting motion for attorney Ellen Shirer Kovach to appear pro hac vice [56-1] IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Ellen Shirer kovach of the firm Frilot, Partridge, Kohnke & Clements, LC is hereby admitted as counsel pro hac vice for dft AutoZone Inc.(cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 11/08/2001)

Nov. 8, 2001 PACER
59

RESPONSE by defendant Autozone, Inc. to motion for leave to modify the rule 16(b) scheduling order [50-1] (PWM) (Entered: 11/09/2001)

Nov. 8, 2001 PACER
61

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in opposition to motion to bifurcate the issues of liability and individual relief during the trial of this case & to bifourcate the discovery in this case. (document placed under seperate cover) (filed w/ exhibits a & b) [46-1] (PWM) Modified on 11/16/2001 (Entered: 11/16/2001)

Nov. 16, 2001 PACER
62

REPLY by defendant Autozone, Inc. brief in support of Autozone's motion to reopen and extend deadline for amending the pleadings re [53-1] (PWM) (Entered: 11/27/2001)

Nov. 21, 2001 PACER
63

MINUTES: discovery ddl set 5:00 9/1/02 dispositive motion filing ddl set 5:00 10/1/02 jury trial set 9:00 1/21/03 which is expeted to last 10 days Type of hearing held: Status Conference Court will entered order denying bifurcation of disc. New deadlines estabilshed Plas experts 4/1/02; Dfts experts 6/1/02; Discovery 9/1/02; Presiding Judge: J. Gibbons PLA Atty: D. Smith & T. Borak DFT Atty: T. Hidalgo, W. Christy, R. Kriegel(all by phone) C/R: Brenda Parker (PWM) (Entered: 11/29/2001)

Nov. 21, 2001 PACER
64

ANSWER by defendant Autozone, Inc. to intervene and affirmative defenses [1-1]; jury demand (PWM) (Entered: 12/03/2001)

Nov. 29, 2001 PACER
65

ORDER ON DEADLINES SET AT STATUS CONFERENCE by Judge Julia S. Gibbons Pla's expert disclosures ddl 4/1/02; Dft's expert disclosures ddl 6/1/02; discovery ddl set 5:00 9/1/02; potentially dispositive motion filing ddl set 5:00 10/1/02; trial set 9:30 1/21/03 which is expected to last 10 days. (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 12/10/2001)

Dec. 7, 2001 PACER
66

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. to withdraw atty Thomas E. Gottsegen (PWM) (Entered: 12/17/2001)

Dec. 14, 2001 PACER
67

ORDER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons granting motion to withdraw atty Thomas E. Gottsegen [66-1] IT IS ORDERED ADJUDGED, and DECREED that Thomas E. Gottsegen, be and is hereby withdrawn as counsel of record for AutoZone, Inc. (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 12/26/2001)

Dec. 21, 2001 PACER
68

ORDER ON MOTION TO BIFURCATE THE ISSUES OF LIABILITY AND INDIVIDUAL RELIEF AND TO BIFURCATE DISCOVERY by Judge Julia S. Gibbons denying motion to bifurcate the issues of liability and individual relief during the trial of this case & to bifourcate the discovery in this case. ..Moreover bifurcation of discovery would result in further delay in the resolution of this case, which has already been pending for some 17 months. In addition bifurcation of discovery would render settlement of the case almost impossible. The motion to bifurcate discovery is denied. With respect to the motion to bifurcate the issues of liability and individual relief, that motion is premature. After discovery is concluded, the court can evaluate the manner in which the case should be tried and make an appropriate resolution of the bifurcation motion in conneciton w/ final pretrial preparation. The EEOC may renew this motion after the close of discovery. [46-1] (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 02/26/2002)

Feb. 25, 2002 PACER
69

ORDER OF TRANSFER by Judge Julia S. Gibbons Case reassigned to Chief Judge James D. Todd in exchange for an equivalent case (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 02/26/2002)

Feb. 25, 2002 PACER
70

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC to compel discovery (PWM) (Entered: 03/04/2002)

March 1, 2002 PACER
71

MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion to compel discovery [70-1] (filed w/ exhibits A-O) Document placed under seperate cover. (PWM) (Entered: 03/04/2002)

March 1, 2002 PACER
72

CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION REGARDING PLA EEOC'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY by plaintiff EEOC (PWM) (Entered: 03/04/2002)

March 1, 2002 PACER
73

ORDER OF REFERENCE by Chief Judge James D. Todd referring to Mag Judge J. D. Breen the motion to compel discovery [70-1] for disposition - (cc: counsel) (EJC) (Entered: 03/06/2002)

March 6, 2002 PACER
74

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. to extend time to respond to pla's motion to compel (PWM) (Entered: 03/15/2002)

March 14, 2002 PACER
75

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in support of motion to extend time to respond to pla's motion to compel [74-1] (PWM) (Entered: 03/15/2002)

March 14, 2002 PACER
76

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE by defendant Autozone, Inc. (PWM) (Entered: 03/15/2002)

March 14, 2002 PACER
77

ORDER by Mag Judge J. D. Breen granting motion to extend time to respond to pla's motion to compel [74-1] Dft Auto Zone is hereby granted until 3/29/02, to file its response to Pla's motion to compel. (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 03/25/2002)

March 22, 2002 PACER
78

SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. to extend time to respond to pla's motion to compel [74-1] (PWM) (Entered: 03/27/2002)

March 26, 2002 PACER
79

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in support of supplemental motion for extension of time to respond to plas' motion to compel [78-1] (PWM) (Entered: 03/27/2002)

March 26, 2002 PACER
80

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT by defendant Autozone, Inc. (PWM) (Entered: 03/27/2002)

March 26, 2002 PACER
81

ORDER by Chief Judge James D. Todd granting motion to compel discovery [70-1] - until 4/12/02 to file its response to Plf's motion to compel - (cc: all counsel) (EJC) (Entered: 03/28/2002)

March 28, 2002 PACER
82

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC for leave to modify the fule 16(b) scheduling Order (PWM) (Entered: 04/01/2002)

March 28, 2002 PACER
83

MEMORANDUM by plaintiff in support of motion for leave to modify the fule 16(b) scheduling Order [82-1] (PWM) (Entered: 04/01/2002)

March 28, 2002 PACER
84

CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION by plaintiff EEOC (PWM) (Entered: 04/01/2002)

March 28, 2002 PACER
85

ORDER ON PLF EEOC UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TOMODIFY THE RULE 16(b) SCHEDULING ORDER by Chief Judge James D. Todd granting motion for leave to modify the fule 16(b) scheduling Order [82-1] Plfs' expert discl are due 9/1/02; Dft's expert discl are due 10/1/02; ddln for completing discovery is 1/1/03 and ddln for filing potentially dispositive motions is 3/1/03. Trial in this matter will be rescheduled for some time during the month of June 2003. The parties will receive a notice of the trial date. all counsel) (EJC) (Entered: 04/03/2002)

April 2, 2002 PACER
86

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in opposition to motion to compel discovery [70-1] (document placed in seperate cover) (filed w/ exhibits 1-10) (Former Emp) (Entered: 04/12/2002)

April 12, 2002 PACER
87

MOTION by defendant Autozone, Inc. to dismiss or to limit monetary relief or to limit temporal scope (PWM) (Entered: 04/16/2002)

April 15, 2002 PACER
88

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in support of motion to dismiss or to limit monetary relief or to limit temporal scope (and on the issue of Laches) (filed w/ exhibits 1-14) (document placed under seperate cover) [87-1] (PWM) (Entered: 04/16/2002)

April 15, 2002 PACER
89

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC for leave to file reply brief (PWM) (Entered: 04/19/2002)

April 18, 2002 PACER
90

MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion for leave to file reply brief [89-1] (PWM) (Entered: 04/19/2002)

April 18, 2002 PACER
91

MOTION by plaintiff EEOC for leave to file reply brief - CJT w/p/o - FMRJ 4/22/02 (EJC) (Entered: 04/23/2002)

April 18, 2002 PACER
92

PROPOSED ORDER submitted by plaintiff EEOC - OJT (EJC) (Entered: 04/23/2002)

April 22, 2002 PACER
93

UNOPPOSED MOTION by plaintiff EEOC for extended 30 days to reponse to dft's motion to dismiss or to limit monetary relief or to limit temporal scope (PWM) (Entered: 05/01/2002)

April 30, 2002 PACER
94

MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion for extended 30 days to reponse to dft's motion to dismiss or to limit monetary relief or to limit temporal scope [93-1] (PWM) (Entered: 05/01/2002)

April 30, 2002 PACER
95

CERTIFICATE OF CONSULTATION by plaintiff EEOC (PWM) (Entered: 05/01/2002)

April 30, 2002 PACER
96

ORDER by Chief Judge James D. Todd granting motion to dismiss or to limit monetary relief or to limit temporal scope [87-1] - Plf is granted 30 days from the date of service of Dft's motion to dismiss to respond to that motion - (cc: all counsel) (EJC) (Entered: 05/03/2002)

May 2, 2002 PACER
97

ORDER DIRECTING DFT TO REFILE ITS RESONSE & GRANTING PLA'S MOTION TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF. by Mag Judge J. D. Breen granting motion for leave to file reply brief [89-1] The dft is directed to resubmit its brief in respone to the pla's moiton to compel, limiting the pgs to 20 in number. Dft shall submit said responsive brief w/n 15 days of the entry of this order. Failure to do so may result in the motion of the pla being granted. In addition, the pla is granted 10 days from the submission of the dft's brief to file a reply brief, limited to 5 pgs in number. Both the responsive brief and reply brief shall be double spaced. (cc: all counsel) (PWM) (Entered: 05/08/2002)

May 7, 2002 PACER
98

RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS OR TO LIMIT TEMPORAL SCOPE AND ON THE ISSUE OF LACHES by plaintiff EEOC to [87-1] w/attached Exhibits [document placed in separate folder] (EHG) (Entered: 05/16/2002)

May 15, 2002 PACER
99

ORDER by Mag Judge J. D. Breen : dft Autozone's motion to exceed the twenty page limit and to submit a twenty-seven page response is hereby GRANTED. (cc: all counsel) (YDS) (Entered: 05/21/2002)

May 20, 2002 PACER
100

MEMORANDUM by defendant Autozone, Inc. in opposition to Plf EEOC's motion to compel - CJt - FMRJ 5/23/02 (EJC) (Entered: 05/24/2002)

May 22, 2002 PACER

State / Territory: Tennessee

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 29, 2000

Closing Date: March 24, 2009

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

Autozone, Inc. (Memphis, Tennessee), Private Entity/Person

Autozone, Inc., Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

Litigation

Amount Defendant Pays: 0

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Pattern or Practice

Discrimination-area:

Hiring

Promotion

Discrimination-basis:

Race discrimination

Sex discrimination

Race:

Black

Affected Gender:

Female

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits

Private Party intervened in EEOC suit