Case: EEOC v. Razzoo's

3:05-cv-00562 | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas

Filed Date: March 22, 2005

Closed Date: May 6, 2008

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The Dallas district office of the EEOC brought this suit against Razzoo's, L.P., a bar company, in March 2005 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The EEOC argued that Razzoo's had violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination against a named male complainant and a class of similarly situated men. The EEOC claimed that Razzoo’s had subjected males to disparate terms and conditions of employment, termination, and…

The Dallas district office of the EEOC brought this suit against Razzoo's, L.P., a bar company, in March 2005 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The EEOC argued that Razzoo's had violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act by engaging in a pattern or practice of discrimination against a named male complainant and a class of similarly situated men. The EEOC claimed that Razzoo’s had subjected males to disparate terms and conditions of employment, termination, and promotion, and had refused to hire male applicants for bartender positions.

On September 20, 2007, the Court (Judge Jorge A Solis) limited the class action size to ninety after the EEOC claimed that the class might be anywhere from ninety to one hundred and fifty and the defendant argued that the class should be limited to seventeen. In April 2008 the parties settled the case, and on May 6, 2008, Judge Solis signed a consent decree that required the EEOC to waive any further right to raise claims, and Razzoo’s agreed to neither discriminate nor retaliate against any employee as stated in Title VII. Specifically, Razzoo’s was required to: refrain from creating a hostile environment for male employees, abandon a 80/20 quota hiring system that favored women, train all employees in gender-neutral hiring and promotion practices, refrain from retaliation against any employee who makes a complaint to the EEOC, affirm a “Zero Tolerance Policy” regarding discrimination and retaliation, and spend no less than $225,000.00 to retain the services of a human resources firm to establish a Human Resources Department within Razzoo’s. Additionally, Razzoo’s was required to establish a $775,000.00 Claim Fund to resolve all claims for damages resulting from the case. The consent decree was in effect for thirty months and it was not be construed as an admission of wrongdoing by Razzoo’s. 2005 WL 6188542.

The case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Shankar Viswanathan (6/3/2008)

Mary Kate Sickel (3/26/2018)

People


Judge(s)

Ramirez, Irma C. (Texas)

Solis, Jorge Antonio (Texas)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Anderson, Suzanne M. (Texas)

Backhaus, William C. (Texas)

Canino, Robert Anthony (Texas)

Clark, Joel P. (Texas)

Francis, Ronetta J. (Texas)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Cowan, Molly B. (Texas)

Luxen, Robert E. (Texas)

Judge(s)

Ramirez, Irma C. (Texas)

Solis, Jorge Antonio (Texas)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Anderson, Suzanne M. (Texas)

Backhaus, William C. (Texas)

Canino, Robert Anthony (Texas)

Clark, Joel P. (Texas)

Francis, Ronetta J. (Texas)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Cowan, Molly B. (Texas)

Luxen, Robert E. (Texas)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

Nov. 3, 2016 Docket
1

Complaint

March 22, 2005 Complaint
73

Order

EEOC v. Razzoo's L.P.

Jan. 23, 2008 Order/Opinion
83

30-Day Order of Dismissal

EEOC v. Razzoo's L.P.

April 29, 2008 Order/Opinion
84

Consent Decree

EEOC v. Razzoo's L.P.

May 6, 2008 Order/Opinion

Docket

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

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT against Razzoo's. L.P. , filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.(mfw, ) (Entered: 03/22/2005)

March 22, 2005

DEMAND for Trial by Jury by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (mfw, ) (Entered: 03/22/2005)

March 22, 2005

***Magistrate Judge Irma Ramirez chosen by random selection to handle matters that may be referred in this case. (mfw, ) (Entered: 03/22/2005)

March 22, 2005
2

CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (mfw, ) (Entered: 03/22/2005)

March 22, 2005
3

Summons Issued as to Razzoo's. L.P.. (mfw, ) (Entered: 03/22/2005)

March 22, 2005
4

ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by Razzoo's. L.P.(lmr, ) (Entered: 05/05/2005)

May 4, 2005
5

CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS by Razzoo's. L.P. (lmr, ) (Entered: 05/05/2005)

May 4, 2005
6

Order Requiring Attorney Conference and Proposal for Contents of Scheduling and Discovery Order. Proposed Scheduling Order due by 6/14/2005.(see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Jorge A Solis on 05/11/05) (lmr, ) (Entered: 05/16/2005)

May 11, 2005
7

Joint Proposal for contents of scheduling and discovery order by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Razzoo's. L.P. (lmr, ) (Entered: 06/16/2005)

June 14, 2005
8

SCHEDULING ORDER: Amended Pleadings due by 11/1/2005. Discovery due by 5/1/2006. Pretrial Conference set for 8/18/2006 09:00 AM before Judge Jorge A Solis. Joinder of Parties due by 12/1/2005. Jury Trial set for 9/5/2006 09:00 AM before Judge Jorge A Solis. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 8/11/2006. Pretrial Materials due by 8/28/2006.(see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Jorge A Solis on 06/16/05) (lmr, ) (Entered: 06/17/2005)

June 16, 2005
9

STANDING ORDER DESIGNATING CASE FOR ENROLLMENT IN THE ELECTRONIC CASE FILES "ECF" SYSTEM. (Signed by Judge Jorge A Solis on 12/2/2005) (mfw, ) (Entered: 12/02/2005)

Dec. 2, 2005
10

MOTION to Extend Time of Court's Scheudling Order by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Francis, Ronetta) (Entered: 03/09/2006)

March 9, 2006
11

Unopposed MOTION to Extend Time of Court's Scheduling Order (Amended) by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (Francis, Ronetta) (Entered: 03/10/2006)

March 10, 2006
12

ORDER Granting 11 Unopposed MOTION to Extend Time of Court's Scheduling Order. Discovery due by 9/5/2006. Docket Call set for 1/8/2007 before Judge Jorge A Solis. Dispositive Motions due by 10/2/2006. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 12/11/2006.(see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Jorge A Solis on 03/27/06) (lmr, ) (Entered: 03/27/2006)

March 27, 2006
13

AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 9/5/2006. Pretrial Conference set for 12/13/2006 09:30 AM before Judge Jorge A Solis. Jury Trial set for 1/8/2007 09:00 AM before Judge Jorge A Solis. Motions due by 10/2/2006. Proposed Pretrial Order due by 12/11/2006. Pretrial Materials due by 1/2/2007.(see order for specifics) (Signed by Judge Jorge A Solis on 03/27/06) (lmr, ) (Entered: 03/28/2006)

March 27, 2006
14

Designation of Experts by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Resume of Expert Sisolak# 2 Appendix Summary of Expert Testimony)(Francis, Ronetta) (Entered: 06/16/2006)

June 16, 2006

State / Territory: Texas

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: March 22, 2005

Closing Date: May 6, 2008

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: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

Razzoo's, L.P., Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

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

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

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: 1,000,000.00

Order Duration: 2008 - 2011

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Pattern or Practice

Discrimination-area:

Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff

Hiring

Other Conditions of Employment (including assignment, transfer, hours, working conditions, etc)

Promotion

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Male

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits

EEOC Intervened in Private Suit