Case: EEOC v. Republic SVCS of Southern Nevada

2:04-cv-01352 | U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada

Filed Date: Sept. 30, 2004

Closed Date: 2013

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On September 30, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought this lawsuit against Republic Services, Inc. and Republic Silver State Disposal, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The complaint alleged that the defendants discharged and/or did not allow employees over the age of 40 to transfer locations because of their age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief. The case was assi…

On September 30, 2004, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought this lawsuit against Republic Services, Inc. and Republic Silver State Disposal, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. The complaint alleged that the defendants discharged and/or did not allow employees over the age of 40 to transfer locations because of their age in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). The EEOC sought injunctive and monetary relief. The case was assigned to Judge David A. Ezra.

The defendants moved for summary judgment on May 24, 2006, which was denied. The court consolidated this case with a private party suit, 2:04-cv-01479 (D.C. Nev. October 27, 2004) in October 2006. In that case, two individual plaintiffs brought ADEA claims against the defendants and sought monetary relief as well as attorneys’ fees and costs.

On September 10, 2007, the defendants again moved for summary judgment. Then, on May 13, 2008, the defendants moved for sanctions against the EEOC, reasoning that the EEOC was advocating meritless claims because they had no evidence backing its advocacy. The court denied the sanction and request for summary judgment on June 3, 2008.

About a month later, the defendant moved yet again for summary judgment. This request was granted in part and denied in part on February 17, 2009. The court granted summary judgment for the defendant as to certain individual disparate treatment claims and the EEOC’s pattern and practice claims. On May 21, 2009, the court ordered the EEOC to pay $4,026 for the defendants’ attorney fees and costs.

After four settlement conferences, the parties reached a settlement agreement. Eventually the parties drafted a consent decree, which the court approved on September 21, 2010. The court retained jurisdiction for three years to ensure that the parties complied with the terms of the consent decree. This decree pertained to monetary and injunctive relief. For the monetary relief, the defendants agreed to pay $2,975,000 to the plaintiffs.

For the injunctive relief, the parties agreed to a series of terms. The parties agreed that the defendant would not engage in age discrimination or retaliation. The parties agreed that the defendants would be monitored by an Equal Employment Opportunity compliance officer. This officer would monitor that the defendant was complying with the ADEA and with terms in this decree. More specifically, the officer was required to monitor the defendants’ audits for age discrimination, review individual employment decisions made by the defendant, reform procedures and practices to track information on hiring, involuntary termination, transfers, and promotion, and ensure that complaints of age discrimination were thoroughly investigated. Moreover, the defendants agreed to post notices of the terms of this consent decree to be visible to their employees at the workplace. Defendants agreed to provide anti-age discrimination training to their supervisors, managers, and human resources managers. The defendant had to develop procedures that would allow for tracking of hiring, promotion, transfer, involuntary termination decisions, and complaints of age discrimination made to management. In addition, the defendant was required to report regularly to the Equal Employment Opportunity compliance officer.

The court’s jurisdiction to ensure compliance with the consent decree ended in 2013, and the case’s docket shows no further activity. This case is presumably closed.

Summary Authors

Justin Kanter (8/6/2008)

Sean Whetstone (7/5/2018)

Related Cases

Robert LaRocca, VS Republic Services, District of Nevada (2004)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6033418/parties/us-equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-republic-services-inc/


Judge(s)

Ezra, David Alan (Hawaii)

Foley, George W. Jr. (Nevada)

Attorney for Plaintiff
Attorney for Defendant

Grandgenett, Roger L (Nevada)

Hicks, Patrick H. (Nevada)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Beasley, Matthew (Nevada)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

2:04-cv-01352

Docket [PACER]

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Republic Services, Inc.

Feb. 24, 2011

Feb. 24, 2011

Docket
1

2:04-cv-01352

Complaint

EEOC v. Republic Svcs.

Sept. 29, 2004

Sept. 29, 2004

Complaint
2

2:04-cv-01352

Amended Complaint

EEOC v. Republic Svcs.

Nov. 19, 2004

Nov. 19, 2004

Complaint
114

2:04-cv-01352

Order

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Republic Services, Inc.

Feb. 8, 2007

Feb. 8, 2007

Order/Opinion

2007 WL 465446

154

2:04-cv-01352

Order

EEOC v. Republic Svcs.

Sept. 13, 2007

Sept. 13, 2007

Order/Opinion
253

2:04-cv-01352

Order

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Republic Services, Inc.

Feb. 17, 2009

Feb. 17, 2009

Order/Opinion

640 F.Supp.2d 1267

320

2:04-cv-01352

Consent Decree

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Republic Services, Inc.

Sept. 21, 2010

Sept. 21, 2010

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6033418/us-equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-republic-services-inc/

Last updated Aug. 18, 2025, 1:33 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
114

ORDER GRANTING 94 Motion to Compel. EEOC will answer Interrogatory No. 21 by 2/16/07. EEOC to pay Republic Silver State Disposal, Inc. $150 for incurred Motion fees. Signed by Judge Lawrence R. Leavitt on 2/5/07. (AXM)

Feb. 8, 2007

Feb. 8, 2007

RECAP
312

ORDER that the deadline for the EEOC and Defendants to file the final proposed consent decree is extended to 8/25/2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leavitt on 7/12/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)

July 12, 2010

July 12, 2010

RECAP
314

ORDER that the deadline for the EEOC and Defendants to file the final proposed consent decree is extended to 9/9/10. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leavitt on 8/26/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)

Aug. 26, 2010

Aug. 26, 2010

RECAP
316

ORDER that the deadline for the EEOC and Defendants to file the final proposed consent decree is extended from September 9, 2010 to September 16, 2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leavitt on 9/10/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)

Sept. 10, 2010

Sept. 10, 2010

RECAP
318

ORDER that the deadline for the EEOC and Defendants to file the final proposed consent decree is extended from September 16, 2010 to September 21, 2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leavitt on 9/17/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ECS)

Sept. 17, 2010

Sept. 17, 2010

RECAP
320

CONSENT DECREE in favor of U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Robert LaRocca, and William Lacy and against Republic Services, Inc., and Republic Silver State Disposal, Inc. Signed by Judge David A. Ezra on 9/21/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ASB)

Sept. 21, 2010

Sept. 21, 2010

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory: Nevada

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Sept. 30, 2004

Closing Date: 2013

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers that were discriminated against because of their age. Two individuals that were discriminated against because of their age.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

EEOC Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Republic Silver State Disposal, Inc., Private Entity/Person

Republic Services, Inc. (Clark County, NV), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 621 et seq.

State Anti-Discrimination Law

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff

Nature of Relief:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Attorneys fees

Damages

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree

Content of Injunction:

Discrimination Prohibition

Retaliation Prohibition

Develop anti-discrimination policy

Utilize objective hiring/promotion criteria

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Provide antidiscrimination training

Implement complaint/dispute resolution process

Reporting

Monitor/Master

Recordkeeping

Auditing

Monitoring

Required disclosure

Training

Amount Defendant Pays: 2,975,000

Order Duration: 2010 - 2013

Issues

Discrimination Area:

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

Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination Basis:

Age discrimination

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits