Case: EEOC v. GLC RESTAURANTS, INC. DBA MCDONALDS

3:05-cv-00618 | U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

Filed Date: Feb. 24, 2005

Closed Date: March 21, 2010

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

The EEOC’s Phoenix district office sued GLC Restaurants d/b/a McDonalds on February 24, 2005 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The EEOC alleged the GLC violated Title VII by engaging in sex-based discrimination. Specifically, it was alleged that GLC sexually harassed a number of female employees and created a hostile work environment. On October 19, 2005 the court granted a motion for additional intervenors. The intervenors alleged a number of tort violations against GLC i…

The EEOC’s Phoenix district office sued GLC Restaurants d/b/a McDonalds on February 24, 2005 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The EEOC alleged the GLC violated Title VII by engaging in sex-based discrimination. Specifically, it was alleged that GLC sexually harassed a number of female employees and created a hostile work environment. On October 19, 2005 the court granted a motion for additional intervenors. The intervenors alleged a number of tort violations against GLC in addition to the Title VII claims.

GLC filed two motions for summary judgment; one regarding the Title VII claims, and another regarding the claims brought by the intervenors. These motions were granted in part and denied in part. Notably, the court granted the motion with regard to the hostile environment of two employees because the claims were time-barred; the court denied summary judgment on the EEOC’s Title VII claims among other things.

Before going to trial, the parties reached a settlement. A three-year consent decree was entered on March 21, 2007. It enjoined defendants from sex discrimination and retaliation, required payment of $550,000 to intervenors and class members, and required defendants to review and revise their discrimination policies as well as appoint someone to oversee these policies and hear discrimination complaints. Further, the defendant could not re-hire a certain former employee, had to provide training for employees, post policies, issue an apology to intervenors and class members, and report regularly to the EEOC. Further, defendants were ordered to pay costs ($26,115.43) and attorney’s fees ($321,600). As there is no further activity in the docket, beyond determinations of costs and notice of partial satisfaction of judgment, presumably this case closed in 2010.

Summary Authors

Kevin Wilemon (6/8/2007)

Rachel Barr (3/18/2018)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4626624/parties/eeoc-v-glc-restaurants-inc/


Judge(s)

Campbell, David G. (Arizona)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Marshall, Michelle G. (Arizona)

Meyer, Valerie L. (Arizona)

Nutter, Karen E. (Arizona)

O'Neill, Mary Jo (Arizona)

Shanley, Sally C. (Arizona)

Smith, C. Emanuel (Alabama)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Blair, James Lawrence (Arizona)

Garcia, Christopher A. (Illinois)

Heintzelman, Yvette A. (Illinois)

Judge(s)

Campbell, David G. (Arizona)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Marshall, Michelle G. (Arizona)

Meyer, Valerie L. (Arizona)

Nutter, Karen E. (Arizona)

O'Neill, Mary Jo (Arizona)

Shanley, Sally C. (Arizona)

Smith, C. Emanuel (Alabama)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Blair, James Lawrence (Arizona)

Garcia, Christopher A. (Illinois)

Heintzelman, Yvette A. (Illinois)

Maatman, Gerald L Jr. (Illinois)

McKay, Neil Todd (Arizona)

Peracke, Nicole K. (Illinois)

Other Attorney(s)

Hathaway, Milton W. Jr. (Arizona)

Nelson, James M. (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket

EEOC v. GLC Restaurants, Inc. d/b/a McDonald's

Jan. 4, 2008 Docket
58

Amended Complaint of Plaintiffs/Interveners

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Jessica J. Tubant, Amanda Henry, Tiara M. Brazle, and Tamara A. Grubbs v. GLC Restaurants, Inc. d/b/a McDonald's Restaurant; Steven Alan Ehresman and Shari Louise Ehresman; Cindy Keppel and John Doe Keppel

Dec. 1, 2005 Complaint
212

Order [Summary Judgment]

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Jessica J. Tubant, Amanda Henry, Tiara M. Brazle, and Tamara A. Grubbs v. GLC Restaurants, Inc. d/b/a McDonald's Restaurant, an Arizona Corporation

2006 WL 3052224

Oct. 26, 2006 Order/Opinion
351

Stipulated Judgment

EEOC v. GLC Restaurants, Inc.

2007 WL 906710

March 21, 2007 Order/Opinion
349

Consent Decree

EEOC v. GLc Restaurants, Inc.

March 21, 2007 Settlement Agreement

GLC Restaurants to Pay $550,000 for Sexual Harassment of Teen Workers by Male Boss

EEOC v. GLC Restaurants, Inc., d/b/a McDonald’s Restaurant

No Court

March 22, 2007 Press Release

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4626624/eeoc-v-glc-restaurants-inc/

Last updated May 13, 2022

ECF Number Description Date Link
31

ORDER granting 26 Motion to Intervene . Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 10/19/05. (DGC, )

Oct. 19, 2005 RECAP
50

ORDER re discovery conference call. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 11/17/05. (DGC, )

Nov. 17, 2005 RECAP
212

ORDER finding as moot 135 Motion to Strike, finding as moot 138 Motion to Strike, granting in part and denying in part 149 Motion for Summary Judgment, granting in part and denying in part 152 Motion for Summary Judgment, granting in part and denying in part 163 Motion for Summary Judgment, finding as moot 178 Motion to Strike, finding as moot 204 Motion to Strike. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 10/26/06. (NVJ)

Oct. 26, 2006 RECAP
217

ORDER denying 214 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 11/28/06. (NVJ)

Nov. 28, 2006 RECAP
328

ORDER denying 225 Motion to Strike ; denying 227 Motion in Limine; granting 229 Motion in Limine; granting 230 Motion in Limine; denying 231 Motion in Limine; granting in part and denying in part 232 Motion in Limine; granting 234 Motio n to Strike ; granting 235 Motion in Limine; denying 236 Motion to Bifurcate; denying 240 Motion in Limine; denying 241 Motion in Limine; denying 242 Motion in Limine; denying 243 Motion in Limine; denying 244 Motion in Limine; denying 245 Motion in Limine; denying 246 Motion in Limine; granting 247 Motion in Limine; denying 248 Motion in Limine; denying 249 Motion in Limine; granting in part and denying in part 250 Motion in Limine; denying 251 Motion in Limine; gran ting 252 Motion in Limine; denying 253 Motion in Limine; granting 254 Motion in Limine; granting 255 Motion in Limine; denying 256 Motion in Limine; denying 257 Motion in Limine; denying 258 Motion in Limine; granting 259 Motion in Li mine; denying 260 Motion in Limine; denying 261 Motion in Limine; denying 262 Motion in Limine; denying 263 Motion in Limine; denying 264 Motion in Limine; denying 265 Motion in Limine; denying 266 Motion in Limine; granting 267 Motion in Limine; denying 268 Motion to Bifurcate; granting in part and denying in part 325 Motion in Limine. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 1/4/07.(NVJ)

Jan. 4, 2007 RECAP

State / Territory: Arizona

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 24, 2005

Closing Date: March 21, 2010

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.

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

GLC Restaurants, Inc. (Cordes Junction, Arizona), Private Entity/Person

Herb Keppel (Cordes Junction, Arizona), Private Entity/Person

Cindy Keppel (Cordes Junction, Arizona), Private Entity/Person

Steven Alan Ehresman (Cordes Junction, Arizona), Private Entity/Person

Shari Louise Ehresman (Cordes Junction, Arizona), Private Entity/Person

Steven Alan Ehresman, Private Entity/Person

Shari Louise Ehresman (Cordes Junction, Arizona), Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

State law

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

State Anti-Discrimination Law

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

Amount Defendant Pays: $897,715.43

Order Duration: 2007 - 2010

Content of Injunction:

Apology

Discrimination Prohibition

Retaliation Prohibition

Post/Distribute Notice of Rights / EE Law

Provide antidiscrimination training

Reporting

Recordkeeping

Training

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination-area:

Discharge / Constructive Discharge / Layoff

Harassment / Hostile Work Environment

Discrimination-basis:

Sex discrimination

Affected Gender:

Female

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits

Private Party intervened in EEOC suit