--------- --"--- ----- ---"---'-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF l\fiSSO
WESTERN DIVISION

AILEEN VILLANUEVA, Individually

)

And on behalf of others similarly situated

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

VS.
WOODBINE HEALTHCARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ~ Serve: Spenserv, Inc. 1000 Walnut, Suite 1400 Kansas City, MO 64106

)

)

Case No.

)

~ 9i ~ 1 6 D./ .- C V- • - S-c)LV'

)

)

)

ROBERT NORCROSS, an individual Serve: 2900 Kendallwood Parkway

)
)
) - --

Gladstone, Missouri 6411 9
DENNY BARNETT, an individual SelVe: 2900 Kendallwood Parkway _~ . Gladstone, Missouri 64119

)
) --. '
)
) .:::..
)

)

Defendants.

)

....- , ""

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

• "

... ', ••• ).

..- I"'" • •-:

~~ 'o'

• .... ''0''' ': ,.:t!'.~~...", ..... ,"';'

Pla.intiffs! for their causes of action against defendant Woodbine Health Care Limited

Partnership ("Woodbine"), Robert Norcross ("Norcross") and Denny Barnett ("Barnett") state

and allege as follows:

L This class action is based upon violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of

1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42

U.S.c. § 1981 and the Missouri Human Rights Act, R.S.Mo. § 213.055 et seq. This action is

brought on behalf of plaintiff Villaneuva individuaUy and on behalf of a class of others similarly

situatedl as deftned more specifically herein, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

OR\G\NAL

2. The members of this class are so num.erous as to make it impracticable to bring all

of them before this Court. Upon infonnation and belief, there are approximately 60-80 present

or former employees of defendant Woodbine who are within the class definition.

3. The class representative and all members of the class are all non-white and are of

the same ancestry and national origin, Filipino. The class representative and all members of the

class were recruited by defendant Woodbine to work as registered nurses and are present or

fonner employees of defendant Woodbine. Thus, ·the class representative will fairly and

adequately protect the interests of the class.

4. There are common questions of law and fact presented herein, and the class
re.presentative's claims are typical ofthe claims of all class'members..-·· ..-

. ':":". 5. The prosecution of separate actions by individual members oflhe class in various ,stat~ and/or federal courts would create a risk of inconsisterit:-or varying adjud~ation with respect

to individual members of the class that would establish incotnpatible standards of conduct for

defendants with respect to members of the elass. ,'I.. .

"'-".',

','," p"

.. . ',- ~.. " ., ··6.

The prosecution of separat~ actions, :by~·ind~i:d~l-·inep1be.rs of the 'class would

create a risk of adjudication with respect to individual members of the class which as a practical

matter would be dispositive of interests of other members of the class not parties to the

adjudication or would substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.

7. Defendants have acted uniformly with respect to all of the class members in that

.

.

.

they have consistently and intentionally discriminated against defendant Woodbine's employees

who are non-white and of Filipino national origin and ancestry with respect to assi~ent, compensation~ promotion~ firing and classification of employees and in the terms and conditions

---------~------------------

2

·--

-.--.-~----

of their employment. Therefore, final declaratory and other ancillary relief would be appropriate for the class as a whole.

8. Questions of law and fact are common to the class and predominate over any questions affecting individual members only.

'9. Plaintiff Aileen Villanueva was born in the Philippines, and is a legal resident of

the United States, currently residing in Kansas City, Missouri. Plaintiff was recruited by

defendant Woodbine and was employed by Woodbine from August 1994 through March 1996.

During the course of her employment with defendant Woodbine, plaintiff suffered discrimination' based upon her race, ancestry and national origin in numerous ways including but not limited to:
..a;- Plaintiff was not given assignments comparable to.: caucasian. registered ,, 'nurses·ernploye4: .by defendant Woodbine even though ·she was qualifi~d to hald 8. ~;gi:~tered ~,nurse position,.;·.by virtue of her Commission on Graduates of ,Foreign Nursing· .S~hools

- ("'CGFNS") certification and her Missouri registered nurse license. In fact: prior to coming to

, •• '

JI. the Yaited .states';"p,Jaintiff Villaneuva had already. r:ece~ved her diploma; :completed.the lic~nsing

, .. : .":~··:;-'-""''fe-quirem~nts of a nurse and was certified as a registered nurse in.the':Phili:ppines',-::···'·,· .

b. Plaintiff was not compensated at the rate promised to her as a registered

nurse, despite her requests for such. compensation and her qualifications.
c. Defendant Woodbine's Director of Nursing, defendant Norcross,

threatened to have plaintiff deported if she complained of the oonditions of her employment. d. Plaintiff was denied the same benefits as white, non-Filipino full time
employees. Plaintiff was required to cover her shift before approval for vacation and was forced to return from her vacation on one occasion in order to work her shift. No such requirement was

3

applicable to non-white full-time employees. Further, plaintiff was denied paid sick leave despite defendant Woodbine's company policy.

10. Defendant Woodbine is a corporation registered to do business in the state of

Missouri- Defendant Woodbine currently is doing business as Woodbine Healthcare Center,

2900 Kendallwood Parkway, Kansas City, Missouri 64119.

11. Defendant Robert Norcross ("Norcross") is an individual who is an agent of and employed by defendant Woodbine as a Director of Nursing.

12. Defendant Denny Barnett ("Barnett") is an individual who is an agent of and

employed by defendant Woodbine as an Administrator, acting within the scope of his

employmen.t with defendant Woodbine! with full supervisory authority over plaintiff.

,1.3".' ,::rb.is .Coq(,t has jurisdiotion over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C·.§, 133·1, becat,lse-.:::. :·

plaintiff has presented f~.deral claims under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. - .. ~,

.... '-~-:::"

14. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

• ," .., . 1,\"( J ,

·:,15. /'. ··,'The class:"of:~lain~iffs is defined as all- emplo)'ee~ of.defendant Woodbine who are -, -":':::'

I
... non:-wt-tite,. who~e ancestry and, national origin is Filipino, and whp .work~ at .def~.ndan.t

Woodbine's Gladstone health center.

16. Plaiptiffs were recruited by defendant Woodbine in the Philippines to relocate to

the Gladstone area to work as registered nurses in their Gladstone health center. Plaintiffs were

promised that upon obtaining a Missouri registered nurses license they would be employed as a

registered nurse and compensated at the rate of$12.50 per hour.

17. However, upon obtaining the Missouri registered nurses license, defendants failed and refused to employ plaintiffs as registered nurses at the rate of $12.50 per hour. Plaintiffs

4

were required, instead, to perform the duties of a certified nurses assistant at the rate of $7.00 per hour solely because of their race, ancestry and national origin.

18. Plaintiffs were required to arrange for their own shift coverage prior to obtaining

approval for vacation time, White, non-Filipino nurses were not required to obtain their own

shift coverage. Further, plaintiffs were denied paid sick leave despite defendant Woodbine's sick leave policy covering full time employees.

19. Plaintiffs were threatened by defendants with deportation if they complained of

their working conditions, In fact, such threats and intimidation by defendants prevented some plaintiffs from exercising their civil rights.

20. Defendants h.ave ,engaged in a pattem and practice of discrimination against

nurses of plaintiff s race,', ancestry and .national origin. Defendant Woodbine intentionally,' '-:~:..", -, '-,'

recruits and hires qualified nurses from:the~Philippines solely to enable them to pay less for their

services and to intimidate them during the course oftheit employment.

"
21.

",-

ceUNT_l_

.... -"':.' ;":' . .: ... "

""',:' -{

" r::' I . • _j :-~.;. i .

lYiolation of 42 U.S.c. § 1981)

o. : _ ~.:.. "_••• " ".. ;'

AI _ ,

•

- :-,. ~" ."." "'-:~:'~.- ~......... , "".

Plaintiffs incorporate by reference herein paragraph numbers 1 through 20 as

though fully set forth therein.

22. Defendants have intentionally discriminated against plaintiff Villaneuva and other

members of the plaintiff class because of their race; ancestry and national origin with respect to

the assignment, compensation, classification, firing and other terms and conditions of their

employment, as set forth previously herein. 23. Defendants' intentional discrim.ination against plaintiff Villaneuva and members
of the plaintiff class has created a' hostile working environment for plaintiffs. The hostile environment created by defendants' intentional discrimination has the purpose or effect of

5

- - - - --~--.-~-~-~~-----

~--~--------.-

creating an intimidating, hostile and offensive working environment and it has interfered with the

work performance of plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the plaintiffs class. The hostile

environment created by defendants' intentional discrimination has seriously affected the

individual employment opportunities of plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the plaintiff class.

The hostile work envirorunent that has been created by defendants' intentional discrim.inatory

treatment of plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the plaintiff class is severe and pervasive and

has altered the class members' conditions of em.ployment and has created an abusive working

environment.

24. Because of defendants' intentional discrimination against plaintiff Villaneuva and

the class members based upon their race, ancestry and natioaa.I. origin, plaintiff Villarteuva and

'7.."

members of the plaintiff class have suffered actual economic damages and are entitled to an

...."~-

appropriate award of back pay.

, ' • • '_-.J/~ •

25. Because of defendants' intentional discrimination against plaintiffVillaneuva and th~ "glass' mem bers based upon,;ilieir rae,e; ancestry and. natronal origin, plaintiff'V·iltaneuva ·ana':-:!;,·,,;;. :~: '~'::'T,. ':~

'members of the plaintiffclaSs',a)'e entitlea,to'ieinst-ateinent promotrons or.transfers, as the case

may be, and are entitled to back pay, overtime pay, bonuses and fringe benefits, and interest

whl,'lre appropriate.

26. Because of'defendants' intentional discrimination against plaintiffVilIaneuva and

the class members based upon their race~ ancestry and national origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and

members of the class are entitled to front pay to compensate them for lost employment

opportunities. 27. Because of defendants' intentional discrimination against plaintiff Villaneuva and
the class members based upon their race, ancestry and national origin, plaintiff ViHaneuva and

6

--

---~-----~------

members of the class are entitled to other compensatory damages including future pecuniary

losses, past and future emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life and other non-pecuniary losses_

28_ Because of defendants' intentional discrimination against plaintiff Villaneuva and

the class members based upon their race, ancestry and national origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and

members of the class are entitled to affinnative injunctive relief to remedy the employment discrimination set forth herein.

29. Because defendants' discriminatory practices have been practiced and performed

with malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of plaintiff Villaneuva and

,
I 7·~""~'

the class' members, plaintiff Villaneuva and members .of the· class are entitled· to an award of

punitive·.~amages.

.. .. ~,-

. :..-.:W:HEREFORE, plaintiff Villaneuva and the class· members pray for judgment· against

defendants for equitable relief preventing defendants from engaging in a pattern and practice of

:: .. discriminat,iQn ~gainst plaintiff and the~cla.ss .membefS...Qn the. basis ..Qf·their rMe, an.cestry-:~and
,~:-":' ." ..... ':.:' "-::" n~tional origin; for a judgment for damages for ~ppropriate ba-ck.pa:y;·frOtlLpay and iIiterest;. for a

judgment for other compensatory damages for the intentional discrimination practiced by defendants which has resulted in pecuniary loss and past and future emotional pain~ suffering,

inconvenience, mental anguish and loss of enjoyment of life to plaintiff and the class members;

for a judgment for punitive damages beoause defendants' discrimination against plaintiffs has

been practiced and performed with malice or reckless indifference to the federally - protected

rights of plaintiff and the class members: for an award of attorney's fees and expert's fees pursuant to 42 U.S,C. § 1988(b) and (c); and for such further and other relief as the Court may deem a.ppropriate or just and equitable under the circumstances.

7

COUNT II (Viola tion of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. and the Misso'uri Human Rights Act)

30. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference herein paragraphs 1 through 29 as though fully

set forth herein.

31. Defendant Woodbine is engaged in an industry affecting commerce and employs
more than 15 people.

3,2. Plaintiff ViIlaneuva has exhausted the administrative remedies of Title VII by

filing a timely charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity COnmllssion, by receiving a

right-to-sue letter from the EEOC. attached as Exhibit 1, and by filing this lawsuit within 90 days

·from the date she received her right to sue letter.

33'r:'-, 'Plaintiff'villaneuva has exhausted the administrative remedies or:,the Missouri ': ":;..

Human Rights Act by filio:g a timely charge of discrimination with the MissourH30mmission on '""'~'

Human Rights, by receiving a righHo-sue letter from the :MHRC, attached as Exhibit 2, and b¥

0"

•

_

,

...

".:0: " J, ';" .filing her lawsUit within 90-days from. the date she rec~ived;her ri~t to sue :letter. '

• ." ,..J>"

• ':'.1.1.1"11',',:"

'.,Plaintiff VillarlUeva will fairly and adequately ,protect the inteiest~Qf,'a:l'l'members '"

ofthis class.

35. Defendants have intentionally discriminated against plaintiff Villanueva and all

other members of the plaintiff class because of their race, ancestry and national origin with

respect to assigrunent, compensation, promotion, firing and classification of employees and in

the terms and conditions oftheir employment. as set forth previously herein.

36. Defendants have engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination against

plaintiff Villaneuva and other members of the class because of their race, ancestry and national

8

origin with respect to the assignment, compensation, promotion, firing and cla.ssification of

employees and in the terms and conditions of their employment, as set forth previously herein.

37. Defendants' intentional discrimination 'against plaintiff Villaneuva and other

members of the plaintiff class has created a hostile working environment for plaintiff Villaneuva

and members of the plaintiff class. The hostile environment created by defendants' intentional

,discrimination has the· putpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile and offensive

working environment and it interfered with plaintiff Villaneuva's individual work performance

and the work performance of other members of the plaintiff class. The hostile environment

created by defendants' intentional discrimination has seriously affected plaintiff Villaneuva's

employment opportunities a.nd the individual employment opportunities of other members o! .~he plaintiff class. The hostile wot!< env:irorunen~ ~at has been created by defendants' intentional

.• •r., - , ' ' , " .'

discriminatory treatment ofpl<lintiffVillaneuva-imd other members of the plaintiff class 1's severe

and pervasive and has altered the olass members' conditions of employment and has created an

.-..! . '
abusive working ~nvironment, "

--, ...."

' ,

.";,...

. , ,-~ . ..' '

.

.

. 38. ,. . Because' of,· defendarie s 'intentional discrimination based upon race" ancestry and..'

' , '.. 1"
"=-~."1.-: • ,"

national original, plaintiff Villaneuva and other members of the plaintiff class have suffered

actual economic damages and are entitled to an appropriate award of back pay_

39. Because of the defendants' intentional discrimination based upon race, ancestry

and national origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and other members of the plaintiff class are entitled to

reinstatement or promotions, as the case may be, and are entitled to back pay, overtime pay,

bonuses and fringe benefits and interest where appropriate.

9
. -----------

40, Because of defendants' intentional discrimination based upon race, ancestry and national origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the piaintiff class are entitled to front pay to compensate them for lost employment opportunities.

41. Because of defendants' intentional discrimination based upon race, ancestry and

national origin) plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the plaintiff class are entitled to other

compensatory damages including future pecWliary losses, and past a.nd future emotional pain)

suffering. inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life and other non-pecuniary losses.

42. Because defendants' discriminatory practices have been practiced and perfonned

with

malice

or

reckless

indifference to
''': .

the

f

e

4e
.~-

r

a. l

l

y
.

pr

otect

e-d .,

ti
,'-

g

ht

s

of plaintiffs,

plaintiff·

....

Villaneuva and other members of the plaintiffciass are entitled to ~ ~ward of punitive damages.

43. Because of defendants' intentional discrimination· based upon race, ancestry a.nd

national origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and other me.mbers of th~ plaintiff class are entitled to

affirmative injunctive reHeft~ re.roedy the employo;ent discrimination ~et forth..above..

pray . ' ........

.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff Villaneuva and the class members

for judgment against··

defendants for equitable relief preventing defendant from engaging in a pattern and practice of

discrimination against plaintiff and the class members on the basis of their race, ancestry and national origin; for a judgment for damages for appropriate back pay, front pay and interest; for a

judgment for other compensatory damages for the intentional discrimination praoticed by

defendants which has resulted in pecuniary loss and past and future emotional pain, suffering,

inconvenience, mental anguish and loss of enjoyment of life to plaintiff and the class mem.bers; for a judgment for punitive damages because defendants' disorimination against plaintiffs has been practiced and performed with malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected

10

. . .~~---~-------~---

rights of plaintiff and the class members; for an award of attomey1s fees and expert's fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C, § 2000e.-5(k); and for such further and other relief as the court may deem appropriate or just and equitable under the circumstances.
DEMAND FOR JURy TRIAL
Plaintiff hereby demands trial by jury in this action of a.ll issues so triable as a matter of right and hereby designates Kansas City, Missouri as place oftrial.

"I'

--, " \. "

..

,"

I

• '0"

ow ... ·,

ANDERSON PLATTS LAW FIRM, L.L.C,

tW-L

Deni M. Anderson
Jennifer H., McCoy",,, '

#39598 #37905.-

305 The Stilwell I04 West Ninth 'St't~et ,-- ~-- -
Kans~s City, Mi!fsow-"i 64'105

.. - ..-'":1" ....... • ,0 • (

(816) 472-1441

(816) 472-4114 (FAX)

ATTORNEYS FORPLAINTWFS

" '

• ~. ;:-~.., .0
" -,\.',.. . ; ....

'.. '

'. .~ :

.. ! I, . . . ..".,....

11

..- - - -----~

-

eQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITV COMMISSION
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUE
(lssl.led on reql.lest)

To:

Aileen Villanueva

4508 N. Locust Kansas City, MO 64116

o

On behalf 0/ u perJ'()1I aggrieved IIIII/W! it/emilY is CONFIDeNTIAL

(29 c'F,R, 1601,7((1))
Charge Number 281970079

IEEOC i1epresentative JoAnn Jackson

( Sse the additional information attached to ~his form'

From: Kansas City Area Office EEOC 400 State Aile., 9th Floor Gateway Tower II kansas City, KS 66101
Tl;llephone Number 913·551-5847

TO THE PERSON AGGF'lIEVED: ihls is your NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUE. It is issued at your reql,Jest. If YOu intend to sue the
respondentls) named in your charge, YOU MUST DO SO WITHIN NINETY (90) DAYS OF YOUR RECEIPT OF.THIS NOTICE:
OTHERWISE YOUA RIGHT TO SUE IS LOST.

More than 180 days have expired since t~.e filing 01 this charge.

Less than 160 days.ha~~.e.)(pired since th,e··filing of this charge, but I have determined that-the·:Commission,-wlll be "

. be

uoaD!e

to

cQ,mph~titits ',

pr.oC;.ess

withir.L.•,1.. S'b "days

from

the

filing

of

the

charge..

. -

" ._;':. ":-..:."' ,:'".

With the issuance of' ,this NOTICE OF RfG·f-I'r'TO·SUE. the Commission is terminating its process with ~es'p'e~,t to ".

this charge.

','. -, .~,

- ..., .,

.,,-

., '
. ....'
.- ,: I'

It has been determined that the Commission will continue to investigate your charge.

ADEA: Whilj:l iitle·Yl',-,~nd th.~.ADA require EEOC to issue this notice of rig,b1."to...sue before yOI,! can bringr.a.:." ' .. '

t"!.wsuit y?U may sue, u!i'ger thl'l Age Discrir.ui~.~tion in Ernploym~~t Ao~ (~D,E.~~~a~y.:,:tiro.~~~,q..~.ay9. !3.!ter YO\J~ ,!?_hi\lrg~.~,

~ ", ,,,.,,.'::' t w."s flled' uri'til 90 days artef'Y'ou receIved notu:e that EEOC has completetl actfon on,¥our charge.

'.

,.~:

:~ :,1

';", I' _

"

• '.':.:...

'

"

~..

•

•

~.

,L\" }'!J"~

-,~ ,'. L"I I • _

...

I _. • -I ..,. :.:.

"01" "

.... .~. B~C.I;II;ltI~' EEpC.'ls ..cjOtl!!"ig your csse. y?ur, lawsuit under tHe ADEA: mUSI::b'e .brought.' W.ithi,n' 9,0 ,f:I-"IY,~.·.9f...y(lli!-' .

. receipt-'o(thi's~·ilhtice ...b1iherlNise, Vour,right to sue is lost,

.

,

',.\ . ;. : " .

,.

c=J EEOC is cOnlinuiog its investigation. You will hI!! no!;ifiE'ld vvhen we have completed action and, if
our notice will inclUde noticr:l of right to sue under the ADEA,

EPA: While Title VII and the ADA require EEOC to issue this Notice of Right to Sue before you can bring a lawsuit, lawsuit you already h~ve the right to sue under the Equal Pay Act (EPA) (You are not required to complain to any enforoement agency belore bringing an EPA suit in court), EPA suits must be brought within 2 years (:3 years for
willful violations) of the ::IlIeged EPA underpayrnent.

I certify ~h::1t tltis notice W/ilS mailed on the date set out below.

Enc:losures
Information Shee!; Copy of Charge
co: Respondents
~EOC ~.'m 1111,S

EXHIBIT

MISSOvru. DEP~ThIENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL ~,I!tLATIONS
i
MISSOUh..l COM:MISSION ON HUMAN kiGHTS

Mor C'''1~hld
(jO:\I~rt..]("

Aloin .... Plummot CDmmlssicn E~Qt'.l[iy~ Dlrl:t:lI:I(

O••id MIt~h"", A.~,I~~ OepUlm.(q
Olnsc,tor

ienld P. Cttlm.n :Jrau,.rl•• ;.nldl.. W. JuhM<ln
rI Dl.rll'i~.
;I~nd. IV. DrYlftl oJ iJUlrI,.
III." LM renllln
lit tJIurI£l
UUlle.Pawell ~ OIltrlt. Dck D. McCall rlo~ft I. EIIoeC...ln 1II DIIIrl.,
II"er I. Roynllld5 'lit DUM" lIedl"! "'d"""" Ir-t.&rrl

Mrs. Aileen Villanueva 4508 N. Locust Kansas City, MO 64UG

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUE

RE: VUlanueva v. Woodbine Healthcare Center FE-10/96-27214; 281970079

Dear Mrs. VUhUlueva:

This is your NOnCE OF RlGHT TO SUE pursl.U'Ult to Section.213 ,111 RSMo.

If, after one hlU1dred eighty days from the filing of a complaint alleging an WlIawful discriminarory practice,
the cmr..misslon hIlS not c:ompleted its aci.nlinistrative processips and the person nggrieved so requests III
writing, the conurussion shall issue to the person claiming to be aggrieved a l~[ter indicating !heir right to
brine il eM! action withlh 90 days of such notlt::r:; against the-respOndent narned in the complaint. Such an action may be brought in any circuit court in 'any··c:ou.my in which the unlawful discriminato.;y practice IS alleged to have occurred, .either-before ·a .ci.r;cuit Qr. associate··ci:rcuit judge. Upon issuance of rhis notice, the (:ommission shall terminate aU p(oceedings relating ,10 the o_t;!mpl'ain[, No person may ·file or reinstate a complaint with me commission after the issuance of a notice under this section relating to the same practice Or act. Any action brought in coutt UI;J.!i~~, th.is s.ec;tion sb~t .Q~..lm.ed within ninety days from the date of the
commission's notification letter 10 the iiidividu3l but no hiter thnn two YCQrs ariel" the alleged clluse
occu[l"ed or its reasonable discovery by the alleged injured party (emphasis added).

The above-.teferenced complaint was flied:oEl October 22, 1996: thus mot'e than 180 days have elapsed since
.the .rlling-and:, tht: Missouri .Corrunission on Hum~ ,Rights has··.not: complete(1 its., administrative p(l?c.e.~sing.. .. ..... , ",
Further,· as you ·have duly requested in writing,' you -are hel1eby notified of your right to sue the Respondent(s)- named in. your com1!I~Un st~~~. Fi~cuit cpun;"" ,TI:llS MUST BE DONE WITHIN 90 OAYS OJ!' THE DATE OF TIllS NOtiC'it OR YOUR RIGlIT TO SUE IS LOST.

You are also notified that the Executive Director is hereby administratively closing this case and (ermi.nZlting all MCHR proceedings relating to it. No person may file or ('einstate a complaint after the issuance of nOtice of right to suc.

o~

n Alvin A. Plummer

Date

-\t.:y'"E~ecutive Director

CEllm'IED MAIL

c::

Woodbinc Heallhc:are Center

Atw: Chief E~ecutive Officer

2900 Kendallwood Parlcway

Gladstone, MO 64119

Ms. Denise M. AndersQn AttOrney at Law 305 The Stilwell, l04 W. Ninth Kansas City, MO 64105

-JJ I~ W. T","lOn BS,d.
p.o. 1I0IC J 119
.J.rce....n City. 1110 6!101-j 11~
rh....' $"J751.JJl~ V"XI ~UI7JI.~!IU'

0\106 011..

040017 r011nl1,l..nl. A....

5ull0 JZO

SUbB 1~

So- Lou\!, MO iJlOI Phon,: JI./JJIO.7~90

PKha........... lCI"IItl'I,.MIIO'·""6"4HI

1',,:1:' JI~I)oIO.71Ja

FU;. U6JJII'-'I07

TOll, Jl4l,l<1Q.7MO

Rilit Mlslouri, I....OO·.,3'·~ (V_II.aOO-7J5.~!IIItI (T'tIgl

Cion .. Slk.aloWn,eM" CO .~--E-X-H-IB-IT---
l'tI~n., 57JM71
I ,,,X, 57]/471.

_- _ _. _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ .........

__ - .. ... ~

- ..- ......

.. .

...

.....

.._._--_.. - - -

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION

AILEEN VILLANUEVA, Individually And on behalf of others similarly situated
Plaintiffs,
VS.
WOODBINE HEALTHCARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, et a1.
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.97-1607-CV-W-SOW

)

)

)

)

)

FIRST AMENDED '. C,LASS ACTION COMPLAINT

p~?m:t.~ffs; [qr thei; cal.:l!;1es of action against defend~ts Woodbine' Health· CaFe-Limited

I "'~I

'''\-:-

Partnership ('.~Woodbine"), Robert Norcross (''Norcross,l) and Denny Barnett ("Barnett") state

. . ... ' ....

...~.. _...:.".', .;.

and allege as follows:

_ l._~.; .....'ll:ti_~. class action is based upon violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of

....

• .: I~

.II.~ .....

'..

It' ,.1 . .,:.

-.,I•"'"• -l.o-"-'.,.".".. -,I'., ,

'o\li-;".'

.lQ,6.4, as agl~nd~~,. 42 U.S .C. § 2000e et seq., section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 18,q.6" 42

, ••...~ ',I"'"",: -\".._ ___ .1.t

,.-

.._ ... 0..

. .~-.:; _":"""';- ::':0;:':::''':'o. _:':.•..:..;.- 0..

-.\,

J. L ....

U.S.C. § 19Si..?l1d the' Missouri Human Rights Act, R.S.Mo. § 213.055 et seq. This action is

brought on behalf of plaintiff Villaneuva individually and on behalf of a class of others similarly

situated, as defined more specifically herein, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure.

2. The members of this class are so numerous as to make it impracticable to bring all

of them before this Court. Upon information and belief, thelie are approximately 60-80 present

or former enlployees of defendant Woodbine who are within the class definition.

3. The class representative and all members of the class are all non-white and are of

the same ancestry and national origin, Filipino. The class representative and all members of the

class were recruited by defendant Woodbine to work as registered nurses and are present or

oRIG iNA L

~ 2 Docume'nt w=

I

'"

4.

There are CO.nun.on questions of law and fact presented herein, and the class

representative'S olaims are typical ofthe claims of all class members.

5.

The pJ;osecution of separate actions by individual members' of the class in various

state and/or federal courts would create a risk ofinconsistent·or varying adjudication with respect

to individual members of the class that would establish incompatible standards of conduct fOf

defendants with respect to members ofthe class.

6. The prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the class would

create a risk of adjudication with·.respect'tClindividual members of the class which as a practical -' ...-

.

.

.. '

".

matter would be dispositi,ve of'.'i:nterests",.,..of other inembers of the class not parties' to the "1"":",

adjudication or would .{i'lJ.bstantiallyimpait':;Oj impede their ability to protect! their interests.

7.

Defendants'have acted ooiforrnly with respect to all of the Class members in that

-'

'I '.,

• ''-i''

........4ey;ha¥.e ,c'Qnsistently an(ih'i~ten'tionally discriminated laga'ins(defendant -'~'b'6'a.bin.~I'·!f:e~l'oyees ,:-.,.,!:.' ~:(.~~" .•

•

"•

• ':1

IJ,7,!~·u'

I

I ••

,•

',,'f.:1,,' ' j'

wh.o' are .non-white-am.:l~~·pfr.·Fnip,in~ national-'origin and anpestry with, respect to assignnienf;"~~'::-~~'':'.:.,·;-.."~,,,:,.L,

compensation, promotion" firing and classification of employ~es and in the: terms and conditions

of their employment. Therefore, final declaratory and other ancillary relief would be appropriate

for the class as a whole,

8.

Questions (If law and fact are common to the class and predominate over any

questions affecting individual members only.

9. Plaintiff Aileen Villanueva was born in the Philippines, and is a legal resident of the United States, currently residing in Kansas City, Missouri. Plaintiff was recruited by

defendant Woodbine and was employed by Woodbine from August 1994 through March 1996.

2

_ ._ ...... .. _.~---

...._ - _ . _ . _ - ~ _ . _ - -

- - - - , -- -----_._------~.

During the course of her ,employment with defendant Woodbine, plaintiffisuffered discrimination

based upon her racel ancestry and national origin in numerous ways including but not limited to:

a. Plaintiff was not given assignments comparable to caucasian registered

nurses employed by defendant Woodbine even though she was qualified to hold a registered nurse position by virtue of her Commission on Orad~te$ of Foreign Nursing Schools

("COFNS") oertification ,and her Missouri registered nurse license. In fact, prior to coming to

the United States~ plaintiff Villaneuva had already received her diploma, completed the licensing

requirements of a nurse and was certified as a registered nurse in the Philippines

b. Plaintiff was not compensated at the tate promised to her as a registered

nurse, despite her requests for such compensatioIl'·and herqWilifications.

- .-....'

c.

Defendant Woodbine's EJirecto{:':'D\f Nursing~ ,defendant Norcross,

threatened to have plaintiff deported ifsh€ 1cbmplained::of::th:~icDnditionsofher employment.

d. Plaintiff was denied the same benefits as white, non-Filipino full time

,. ' ,-.-.~,,-, '....

..~.

~I., employees, P.laiati~waS:':fequire~Hocover her shift:before approval fdr vacation and 'wa:s~6rc'e'd '\::::'" .. ,:,.. "',.~_:;""

,:,..,

to return from q,er \:'acation on one_bcca~i~~,~"~i-'dc,['to;6rk lier'shift'· No such requirement-was"

I.

-!_" . "'. . . . .

applicable to non-white full-time employees. Further, pla!intiff was denied paid sick leave

despite defendant Woodbine's company policy.

10. Defendant Woodbine is a corporation registered to do business in the state of

Missouri. Defendant Woodbine currently is doing business as Woodbine Healthcare Center,

2900 Kendallwood Parkway, Kansas City, Missouri 64119.

11. Defendant Norcross is an individual who is an agent of and em.ployed by

defendant Woodbine a.s a Director of Nursing. As the Direotor of Nursing, defendant Norcross

had direct super:visory authority over plaintiff Villanueva and the class members

3

12. Defendant Barnett is an individual who is an, agent of and employed by defendant Woodbine as an Administrator~ acting within the scope of his emplqyment with defendant Woodbine, with full supervisory author,ity over plaintiff.

13. This Court hasjudsdiction over this action pursuantto 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because plaintiff has presented federal claims Wlder Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981.
14. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.s.C. § 139~.

15. The class of plaintiffs is defmed as all employees of defendant Woodbine who are

non-white, whose ancestry and national origin is Filipino, and who worked at defendant

Woodbine's Gladstone health center.

..:',: .~, ., '":"'-'" " i€i. : Plaintiffs were recruited by defendant WoodBine ~ fh~',PhilippineS"~to relocate to

....

:"":,~",- ~~,,,r. :: '-:the

Glads~oI ne

area

to

work

as

.• .
registered nurses

I'
in their

G1adsto~e,;he~ith ~enter, 0' .... ·~..,1~:!:;::-·...,'.: ....~-...

.'

r()'" .;....
elaintiffs were

l

O. '.. I

•• ~ I

... '",: promist:d.:.that upon obtaining a Missouri registered nurses licen~~:theY'WOUld'.b~"'4.mployed'as a

registered nurse and compensated at the rate of$12.50 per hour. '

~ .. ,. JIl"

I ....... '.,'"":~-;.., .-:t', :·~··M;

.-, ..

'11\" ,," :"'. ,\' • '17. '", However; upon obtaining the, MisS0Uri registel!ed nur$~s:-lice1nse. defendants fafled .

~

• ;••r.;-

n~':....· · "

.l

•

I,

:. ·':.I·~~: .trfl..1'oJ'·' (- \1;

~- - ,

"':.'~:'~~-:':"': ~~," "~/Ul.d re:fusecd to employ plaintiffs as registered nurses at .,the' rate'::o-t-;$.1'2'~·5~ ..per ,hour., Plaintiffs

,f. I.

were required, instead, to perform the duties of a certified nurses assistant at the rate of $7.00 per

I

hour solely because of theilt' race, anoestry and national origin.

I

I

...I

I

18. Plaintiffs were required to arrange for their own shift caver~ge prior to obtaining

~

approval for vacation time. White, non-Filipino nurses were not required to obtain their own shift coverage. Further, plaintiffs were denied paid sick leave despite defendant Woodbine's

I

sick leave policy covering full time employees.

19. Plaintiffs were threatened by defendants with, deportation if they oomplained of

their working conditions, In fact, such threats and intimidation by defendants prevented some

plaintiffs from exercising th.eir civil rights.

4

20. Defendants have engaged in a pattern and! p.-actice of discrimination against nurses of plaintiffs race, ancestry and national origin. Defendant Woodbine intentionally

recruits and hires qualified nurses from the Philippines solely to enable them to pay less for their
services and to intimidate them during the course of their employment
COUNT I CYiolatioD of 42 U.S.c. § 19811

21. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference herein paragraph numbers 1 through 20 as though fully set forth therein.

22. Defendants Norcross and Barnett were responsible for employing defendant

W0odbine's nursing.., staff.. Defendants have intentional[y discriminated against plaintiff

.vi,11~.Q.~,uv~..,~nd oth.er_members of the plaintiff class because of their race, :ancestry. and national

' . . _ ....\t:~I':' " '0'.,

}~.,

!. .JZ."'\:~" "I.,..

._~~•. :

. o,dgi,q with" re~p~ct ...to the assignment, compensation, classification, firing' and other terms and

',"'::

•• I. >(••••':- ':'I~

... ~: ..~; ..

conditions oftheir employment, as set forth previously herein. Defendants Norcross, Barnett and

r

: .•••

_.

tI"~: ..

'Wooqbi.\.1~f~iled tQ~hi~e or promote plaintiff Villanueva and other members' of the class to higher

~f"t'

·....'1 ~I'l

'•

.; "

1. ,- • ......1 • ~ ~. ".;, ,.'r,~ I. ".'1"' • - ,~:t

(..- '.

7:' 01"

"\.

' ' ", • \"

, ...' . . pay,ipg ~gt~tered m,urse positions. Defendants Norcross, Barnett and Woodbine reqll;ired plaintiff

',- ·::.'"hl'~·"'.'~' "",_

. . ' " "J",:'. "':~~·.:::?~~~~M~ :~ .·'oX. "

. , ' ••,'.

Villanueva and other class members to cover their own shifts prior to approving vacati9n,

refused to grant them paid sick leave and otherwise harassed and intimidated them. When

plaintiff Villanueva and other class members complained about these conditions, defendant

Norcross threatened to have them deported.

23. Defendants' intentional discrimination against plaintiff Villaneuva and members

of the plaintiff class has created a hostile working envirownent for plaintiffs. The hostile

environment created by defendants' intentional discrimination has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile and offensive working environment and it has interfered with the work perfonnance of plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the plaintiffs class. The hostile environment created by defendants' intentional discrimination has ser,iously affected the
5

individual employment opportunities of plaintiff ViIlaneuva and members of the plaintiff olass.

The hostile work environment that has been created by defendants' intentional discriminatory treatment of plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the plain~iffclass is severe and pervasive and

has aIte.red the class members' conditions of employment and has created an abusive working environment.

24. Because of defendants' intentional discrimination agaiast p[aintiff Villaneuva and the class members based upon their race~ ancestry and natienal origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and
and members of the plaintiff class have suffered actual economic damages are entitled to an

appropriate award of back pay,

2.5. ,B.. ~c.ause .of'.:defendants' ,interttional discrimination against p~aintiffV illaneuva.· and -.,

the class members based .~pon:·their r·ace, iu~cestry and national origin, plaintiff ViUaneuva and . 0001;,:" ," 00,',

.

,

members of the plaintiff.c~ass are entitled.-·~9 ·reinstatement, promotions Or' transfers, as the case;'· ' '.;..;:;,

may be, and are entitled to back 'pay, overtime pay, bonuses and fringe ibe.nefits, and interest

,. ,,}Vhe~li appl'opriate,~-

• ,'~...

.' ",'". ''''~~¥I '.' 1.11~'.'

the class members based upon their race, ancestry and national origin, pla,inti1;f Villaneuva and members of the class .are entitled to front pay to compensate them for lost employment opportunities.
27, Because of defendants' intentional discrimination against plaintiff Villaneuva and the class members based upon their race, ancestry and national origin, plaintiff VilIaneuva and members of the class are entitled to other compensatory damages including future pecuniary losses, past and future emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life and other non-pecuniary losses.

6

.. _ .l"".
---~_

28. Because of defendants' intentional discrimin~tionagainst plaintiff Villaneuva and the class members based upon their race, ancestry and national origin. plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the class are entitled to affirmative injW1ctive relief to remedy the employment discrimination set forth herein.
29. .Because defendants' discriminatory practices have been practiced and perfomled with malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of plaintiff Villaneuva and the class members, plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the class are entitled to an award of punitive damages,
WHEREFORE, plaintiff Villaneuva and the class members pray for judgment against defendants for equitable relief preventing·defeodants..from engaging in a pattern and practice of discrimination against plaintiff and the class members on the-''basis of their race, ancestry and
national origin; for a jUdgment for damages· for appropriate ·baek:-;pay. front 'pay and interest; for a judgment for other compensatory damages·· f9r the -intentional discrimination practiced by

'.""
1
!

' .inconvenience, me~ta.l. anguish and loss of'~J,;1j'!'3yment~f:Iife ito pl-amtiff and the class memb~rs; .... . .. for a judgment for punitive damages because defendants' dliscrimination against plaintiffs has
been practiced and performed with malice or reckless indifference to the federally - protected rights of plaintiff and the class members; for an award of attorney's fees and expert's fees pursu,ant to 42 U.s.c. § 1988(b) and (c); and for such further and other reaief as the Court may deem appropriate or just and equitable under the circumstances.
COUNT II (Violation of Title VII of the Civil aights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000~e, et seq. and the Missouri Human R.!ghts Act) 30. Plaintiffs inoorporate by reference herein paragraphs 1 through 29 as though fully set forth herein.
7

_- - . _ - - - - - .~~- ..

...

-'-"

31. Defendant Woodbine is engaged in an industry affecting oommerce and employs more than 15 people.

32. Plaintiff Villaneuva has exhausted the admiinistrative remedies of Title VII by filing a timely charge with the Equal Employment Oppo:ritunity Comm~ssion, by receiving a

right-to-sue letter from the EEOC, attached as Exhibit 1, andiby filing this bwsuit within 90 days from the date she received her right to sue letter.
33. Plaintiff Villaneuva has exhausted the administrative rem~dies of the Missouri

Human Rights Act by filing a timely charge of discdmination with the Missouri Commission on

Human Rights, by receiving a right-to-sue letter from the MHRC, attached as Exhibit 2, and by

. .,

~

,..

:.~ filing. her: lawsuit within 90-days from the date she receiv.ed her ~ig\lt,t(p;ue:-I-etter.. ,' .

:"

, 34,..",,,

Plaintiff Villlanueva will fairly and ,adequateLyl protelVt the· interest o:f:all members

I

,

'

••••

of this c!:ass.

,.~

.

• - ',"'1""

\ '-i'=-' ~ ,

. ~~'. D.efendants have intentionally discriminated ~gain~t plaintiff'lmanueva and all

,'1'\:,,,,,, .,;:;. ",ot4e,r memb~~s of the pl~in:tiff class."b,ecavse ·9:~..thei.r:"lj;'Cel: ancl;str,Y,,,,:alild:-national .origin with,"··. "".'"

m ....";:,"""~~:j~. _;- ,,';J:e~pect)o",assignm_~1J:t, compensation, promotion, firing ·and';,cla:ssifiCation ~of employees and...

,

•

.

I'

the terms and conditions of their employment,' as set forth previou.sly herein:

36. Defendants have engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination against

plaintiff Villaneuva and other members of the class because of their race, ancestry and national origin with respect to the assignment. compensation, promotion, firing and classification of employees and in the terms and conditions of their employment, as ~et forth !previously herein.

37. Defendants' intentional discrimination against plaintiff Viillaneuva and other members of the plaintiff class has created a hostile working enviromnent for plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the plaintiff class. The hostile environment [created: by deifendants' intentional discrimination has the purpose or effect of creating an imimidating, hostile and offensive

s

working environment and it interfered with plaintiff Villaneuva's individual work performance

and the work performance of other members of the plaintiff class. The hostile environment

created by defendants' intentional discrimination has seriously affected plaintiff Villaneuva'S

employment opportunities and the individual employment opportunities of other members of the

plaintiff class. The hostile work environment that has been created by defendants) intentional

discriminatory treatment of plaintiff Villaneuva and other members of the plaintiff class is severe

and pervasive and has altered the class members' conditions of employment and has created an

abusive working environment.

38. Because of defendant's intentional discrimination based u~on race, ancestry and

,nati.o~?l 9rigin~!~.'plaintiff.-Villaneuva and other members of the· plain:.~·rr class ha~e'·~.:~~red· ..

. . actua-1' ecoAomic:damages, and are entitled to an appropriate award of back pay.

,. ·'1' •

'.

.. 39., Because of::the defendants' intentional discrimination based upon 'race.. ancestFy ,.....-

and natio_na.l origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and other members of the plaintiff class are eotitled to

(~:'. .rs:instatem.ent ,~r: promotionS~,las the case' may be, and .ar.e,'·obmti1ti~d'ti)"oa:ek pay, eVerttrne ·pay,

"

,

.

bonu:ses'~and fringe benefits ~d interest where appropriate.· !

40. Because of defendants' intentional discrimination based upon race, ancestry and

national origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and members ofthe plaintiff class are entitled to front pay to

compensate them for lost employment opportunities. 41. Because of defendants' intentional discrimination ba~ed upon race, ancestry and

national origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and members of the plaintiff dass a.re entitled to other

compensatory damages including future pecuniary losses, and past and future emotional pain,

suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life and other non-pecuniary

losses.

9

__________._~----_.._. _._--- ~._----_~

I

42. Because defendants' discriminatory praotices have been practiced and performed

with malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of plaintiffs) plaintiff

Villaneuva and other members of the plaintiff class are entitled to an award ofpunitive damages.

43. Because of defendants ' intentional discrimination based upon race, ancestry and

national origin, plaintiff Villaneuva and other members of the plaintiff class are entitled to

affinnstive injunctive relief to remedy the employment discriminatiau set forth above.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff Villaneuva and the class members pray for judgment against

defendants for equitable relief preventing defendant from. engaging in a pattern and practice of

discrimination against plaintiff and the class members on the basis of their race, ancestry and
nation.al origin;.for ajudgmen~..for damages for appropriate back pay, front:pay and interest; for a·
.. ,) judgment for ~~her compe~~~t~:rY;;"d;mag~s' for the intentional discrimination practi~~d -b~

defendants which has resulted..in pecuniary l~.~.§l and past and future emotional pain, suffering,

inconveniencel mental anguish and loss of enjoyment of life.to plaintiff and the class members;

, ...

for- .~:d~I:\~~~r.t ·(or·'p~nitive damages because defendants' dliscr~~inatio"t:t,«ga:i..rl:~t'plaihti~fs~has

bee!). practi,,?e~ and'..pt;rforined .with mal.ice dr reckless indifference to the federally proteCted"

rights of plaintiff and the class members; for an award of attorney's fees and expert's fees

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2@OOe-5(k); and for such further and other relief as the court may deem

appropriate or just and equitable under the circumstances.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff hereby demands trial by jury in this action of all issm.es so triable as a matter of

right and hereby designates Kansas City, Missouri as place oftrial.

10
--------------------------------

-----------~-------

ANDERJ? & ASSOCIATES, LLC

By: ~

;&--~--~,

Denise M. Anderson

#39598

Jennifer H. McCoy

#37905

305 The Stilwell

104 West Ninth Street

Kansas City, Missouri 64105

(816) 472-1441

(816) 472-4114 (FAX)

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

CERTIFICATE OF SERV[CE

I hereby certify that a copy ofthe above and foregoing was:

oooG3(

mailed (first class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid}

transmitted via facsimile

hand delivere4·· __._.__

,; .'

sent via overnight delivery servioe

t i this

day of Aprill998, to:

7.......

Karen R. Glickstein
James C. Cox 1200 Main Street, Suite 1500
Kansas City, Missouri 64105
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS' u,.. _
1

11

 
 IN: THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OfF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION'

AILEEN VILLANUEVA)

)

Individually and as Class Representative, )

And

.

tv Plaintiffs,. ,,\ ()\~ ('\1

EQUALE~LOYMENTOPPOR~~

cOrvrrvuSSJON,

)

)

Plaintiff- Intervenor,

)

)

v.

)

Case No. 97-1607-CV-W-SOW

)

- }- .0'"7,.'0-", '~.: ...: ::~~~~~J;~ARE LI~~~!-?

.. .~ ....: '....

, ",

i

.. I'

•• , '.•~_ •• :..... •• "' ..:.... ,""_'''M;''~_'~ •

" )"

I.·.,...

)

"
"I,. ,

I

ORDER OF FINAL APPROVAL OF AMENDED CONSENT DECREE

The ~ourt, after proper notice to th~:.0~.mbers.:ofth.e'i;(i1asS,.held a hearing on June

4, 1999 at ~:.oO a.m. The Court having heard a.l1 persofiS-:'appearing and requesting to be

,

I

,

heard and having considered all matters before' the Court wi~Ii'regard to this matter and

the Amended Consent Decree fmds that the terms ofthe Am~nded Consent Decree are

lawful~ fair, just, reasonable, adequate and that the settlement oftrus'matter was reached

after good faith, arm's length negotiation and in the absence ofcollusion, Considering

the economic benefits ofthe settlement to the class, the possibility ofplaintiffs' success

in obtaining relief prayed for as eompared to the economic benefIts ofthe settlement, the

relative strength ofthe claims, the costs and uncertainties of~her litigation and the

likelihood ofcollection ofany damages the Amended Consent Decree is hereby

APPROVED.

OR1G\NAL

DOCUMENTI_q_~_

-------------~----

-

THEREFORBITISORDEREDTHAT

1. The Amended Consent Decree is approved as lawful, fair, just. reasonable and adequate.

2. The following stipulated class of persons were previously certified by

Order of Court dated March 8, 1999 as a class under subparagraph (b)(3) of Rule 23: All

persons of Filipino race, national origin and ancestry employed by defendant Woodbine

Health Care Limited Partnership pursuant to H-l A visas between and after November 20,

1993 through October 31, 1998 in connection with Woodbine's Attestations filed with

.,- .the Utl:~~e;,p"States Depart'inent of Labor and Woodbine's Retitions for a NorJrnm.ig.rant

•

,

).1:-

I

I

Worker filed with the Unifed States Department of Justice, Inunigration and

'.

0' ....... ,

-•

•

• .,." .1...•• ...

~ 0"

';"'.

Naturalization Service who have not previously settled and released their claims for the

described time period.

, .,

, 3.

I ,I

,

•

."

. . f I,' '~.. '. 1';-- ,', ':" ..... "

,

The'mailing ,

of notice

to

members

of the

class

was, th.e, best

notice

practic~bie'to the' class ~e~bers under the circumstances ~f~m~';a~ti~Ji and :c~'~;~f~~t~~

due and sufficient notiee to all persons entitled thereto.

4. The parties are hereby directed to take all further actions as provided by
the Amended Consent Decree and in accordance with this Order. 5, T~e Cowt adopts and approves distribution ofthe settlement funds to the

class members pursuant to the formula set forth in the Notice to Eligible Claimants of Proposed Consent Decree.
6. Upon receipt of the settlement funds from the defendant, on or about June 18, 1999, the third party administrator shall deposit such funds in ,an interest bearing account.

7. The tJrird party administrator is directed to make allocations and payments

in accordance with the formula set forth in the Notice to Eligible Claimants of Pro,lX)sed

Consent Decree. The third party administrator shall make such payments in such

amounts as are contained in the final Exhibit C to the AliIlended Consent Decree, which

shall be filed with the Court on or before June 25, 1999. The third party administrato.\"
shall forward to each,c1ass member the amount due pursuant to fmal Exhibit e in the

manner provided in section lIe ofthe Amended Consent Decree no later than July 6,

1999t with the exception ofthose class members as proViided below.

8.

With r.espect to any class membe~ for wh0m the third party administrator

lacks either a social security number or a W-4, the third party administrator shall

promptly forward to e:;l.ch such class member the appropriate forms to complete together

with a letter requesting ,the inforrnatio:r:UU1d explaining the need for this information. The

third party adnrinistra!QJ shall have an additional 30 days within which to foJ;Ward fimds

...

'I

" ·to these'class members. The third party administrator shall promptly notify counsel for

,

,

all parties of the failure of any class memb~r to return the requested information.

9- The third party administrator is directed to pay the premiums provided in

accordance with the Notice to Eligible Claimants of Proposed Consent Decree.

10. The third part)' administrator is directed tID' pay Class Counsel's attorney

fees and to reimburse Class Counsel for costs and expenses as provided in the Amended

Consent Decree and in acco1.'dance with the Court's Order of Approval and Authorization

of Payment of Attorney Fees and Expenses.

3

11. The third party administrator shall provide an accounting of all

distributions, a copy of each check issued Wld statement ofwithholdings to cOW'lSel for all

parties on or before December 31, 1999.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

,.. '~1
I.
J~#7::<

:"1-:'.

4
._-------_.-------------- - - - - -----~- - - - - -

 
 IN THE ~ITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURr
WESTERN DIVISION

AILEEN VILLANUEVA,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

and

)

)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

)

)

v.

)

)

WOODBINE HEALTHCARE LIMITED

)

PARTNERSHIP, ROBERT NORCROSS

)

and DENNY BARNETT,

)

_ _ _ _-=-.......;D=e-""f.:::e~n~d~a.:;i:;,n::;,:,t""'s""',~~·_,--"'

)
---=-__ ) .,

CIVIL ACTION NO. 97-1607-CV-W-SOW
JURY TRIAL DEMAND

COMPLAINT qF PLAINT·!,FF- INTERV:ENOR EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title VII Of, t~e Civil Rights

:"~'I

~ .l. - .. " , " .......

"".;,:l· .,.r" 1" 1~...

\,' ....t11~:

1" II ~~:.' .• ::'

• '~.~~'~;•.:·,'l' .:'='~~h•.·a!,. ""f!" ';.1"

Act of 1964 and Title I of the civil Rights Act of 1991 to

... ,. .'

:0' I "' •• -"l~~~...tc~: .':"'~'_;

"

.,o{1.J"~,1 .I~ ,r" -I I

:: • • _ _ • • • • • • • -.:: , ' , :•• ,..........

correct unlawful employment practioes on the basis of national

origin, and to provide appropriate relief to Plaintiff Aileen

Villanueva, Marie Lansangan, and a class of Philippine persons

who were adversely affected by such practices. Defendant's

practices include failing to employ Villanueva, Lansangan and

other Filipino employees in positions as Registered Nurses,

failing to compensate them as Registered Nurses, and harassing

and intimidating Villanueva, Lansangan and others because of

their national origin, Philippine.

OR j:~··I~If\.L

-\

:, ,'.-'to\

!ocument 111~'i;

JURISD1C~ION AND VENUE

1. Jurisdiction of this Cour~ is ;nvoked pursuant to

28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Sect1• 0ns 70GI;(f) (1) and (3)

and 707 of Title VII of the Civil Rights ,Act of ~9!64, as amended,

42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) (1) and (3) and -6 ,(IITitle Vi11 1I ), and

Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 19.91, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.

2. The employment practices alleged tOI be unlawful

were and are now being committed within ~he jurisdiction of the

United States District Court for Western ;Distr,ict of Missouri,

Western Division.

• ::~

I•

PARTIE:S

' : , " , . :• •

I•

3 . plaintiff - Intervenor,'" t.he !Bqual.., E:mplLoyment

.. ...."~Opportunity Commission (the nCommissi~:mll)" is''~h~ ~gency of the

United States of America charged with ,the admini·st~ation,
'i'a "±'nte,rpret'a-tion and en£'orc::ement:"of Tii:.i<e vi~'I ',:'" an~ J:'express'lY"

,

I'

a:uthorized to bring' this ao·ti:on":b¥-'-S~'Gj:J:.i·pns::7:016(,f:k(1'~ ,and (3),'

I

,. and 707 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000,e-~,(f) (1), .a:6.d (3) and -6.

4. At all relevant times, Defendan~ W09dbine Healthcare Limited Partnership (IIDefendant ll ) has been a Missouri

limited partnership whose general partners are PRC'Woodbine, Inc.

and Woodbine General Corp., both of whom are Illinois

corporations. Defendant has done business continuously and at

all relevant times in the State of Missouri, in the City of

Gladstone, as Woodbine Healthcare Center. Defenda~t has continuously had at least 15 employees.

5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously

been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 701(b), (g) and (~) of Title VII, 42

U.S.C. § 2000e(b), (g) and (h).

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

6. More than thirty days prior to the ,institution of

this lawsuit, Aileen Villanueva and Marie Lansangan filed charges with the Commission alleging violations of ~itle VIr by

Defendant. All conditions precedent to this inter~ention have

been fulfilled. Attached as Exhibit A is a certification that

this' case is of general public import-ance ..-:·-'

. ',,"

7.

Sinc'e at ··least December 1.$1:, -.1.99,4',. Defendant has

engaged in a pattern and practice of unlawf~l ,employment p~ciices at its Gladstone, Missouri, f'ac'il~ity in vioiation of

Sect.ion 703 of Title VII I 42 U. S. C. § 20010e-2. 1 'Defendant ·'.';'3~: .:':': ~'\' :r.ecru"it'ed v.±'llanu'eva, ,Lans,a'nga:n,' -attd' othe;r.-I:"F:i ~i~~:~os 1 i "<ling in ','. . ""·""':'.!i, ,:.",~:: ",the: P,h-iili:ppines to work at its Gladst(l)ne-/~~M~ssb~~i,faci1d:.ty in

the United states,as Registered Nurses. Defendant agreed to pay

them as Registered Nurses. Thereafter, when the Filipinos
arrived in the United states, Defendant refused to assign them to

positions as Registered Nurses and compensate them as agreed, but

instead assigned them to work in lower-level and lower-paid

positions because of their national origin. Moreover, Defendant

harassed and intimidated Villanueva and Lansangan and other Filipinos because of their national origin.

3

----------------------------

8. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraph 7 above has been to deprive Villanueva, Lansangan and

other Filipinos of equal employment opportunities ,and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees, becausl8 of their
national origin.

9. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were and are intentional.

10. The unlawful employment p~actices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were and are done with ma~ice or with reokless indifference to the federally p~otected rights of

Villanueva I Lansarrgan and other Filipinos:.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF'

.-. ':.'

" '. :~. Wheref0:te, the Commission respe,ctful,ly requests,. that

''

this Court:

Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant"

".r." ":"' fJ";its ofiE,'ice!L-'I3'" succa'6's,ors, assigns, and:,alw.- per~ons'i in ac.t~iv,e~:: ;',:.

"

. ',-'

cono.e,:r;'J::t'::o:r::·',participatfon, with it, from engaging: in,!'an.d.:~;;my~ ot,her

employment practice which discriminates on the basis of national.

, ..... 'If
• ,.'1
.' .t.J,~1 • -

origin.

B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out

policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment

opportunities for Filipinos and which eradicate the effects of

its past and present unlawful employment practices.
c. Order Defendant to make wh~le Villanueva,
Lansangan, and its past and present Filipino employees, by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in

4

, - - - - - _ _-_.~.._._---~

_.-

amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief

necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment

practices, including but not limited to rightful place a.ssignment into Registered Nurse positions.

b. Order Defendant to make whole Lansangan,

Villanueva, and its past and present Filipinos employees, by

providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses

resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in

paragraphs 7 and 8 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

E. Order Defendant to make whole Lansangan,

Villanueva, and i~s pa~t.and present Filipino employees by

,! "

"• • •1 .

pr.oviding· ·compensat.ioll...:(Qr p'iJ,st and futu:t:'ie nonpecuniary losses

resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including emoti~nal pain, isuffering,

inconvenience, loss· of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in

amounts, to be determi~ed at tri~~.

,:

F,. .Or.dr;r" 'P.e,f~ndant to pay punitive damages for its "1 •
maliciouS and reckless conduct. described in paragraphs 7 and a

above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

..... :.'~"-:." :l. '-'"

G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems

necessary and proper in the public interest.

H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

5 __ _- - - - - . _ . _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ . ...~-_.__.. .. -_.~---_._._

JURX TRIAL DEMAN» The Commission requests a jury,trial on all questions of fact raised by its Complaint.
Respe~tfully submitted,

STEPHEN L. HILL, JR. U.S. Attorney

C. GREGORY STEWART General Counsel

GWENDdLYN YOUNG REAMS
Deputy. General Counsel Trial !services

, ""'1:(.
,,
, ..," .. '.

.,,' ".::

..:.~: ROBERT. G'•• JiOHNS
-- -", -:4eda -.... '·.Re,gionta1.:, ~t'torn
._.~ rM .
- DONNA L :""'11,M~:PER

MoBar No.· 2,6406

'.00' senior>TF1a,l Attorney

'''''':'' "., ,

...

,

.~ '~: E:GU;AL' .EMPLO~.MENT· OPPORTUNITY'

.. ~.'

COMMISSION .:-

.

,. ,..:,..,,~.::~~$:t ,.:',; ,Louis D,:±'.st.:r:ict Office

. Robert:A. Young Federal Bldg .

. . .122.2 Spruce" Room 8.100

st. Louis, MO 63103

(314) 539-7918

._-------_._---~--_.---~~--

6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION

AILEEN VILLANEtrvA;

)

)

plaintiff,

)

)

and

)

)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY

)

COMMISSION,

}

)

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

)

)

v.

)

)

WOODBINE HEALTHCARE LIMITED

)

P~TNERSHIP, ROBERT NORCROSS

)

and DENNY' BARNETT,

)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ---'Do.:.e~fe:_:.n~d~a"'_"n""'t.:.:s...:..

~_)

CIVIL ~CTION NO.
~7~1607-CV-W-SOW
,'

CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE',' on'behalf of the Equal Employment oppoi0unit~'

Commis'sion:i I hereby certify that this case is of, general public

This certification is made pursuant to ~he

• • • • • • • ,. I' ••

,

0.'

'••

_"._.,.r,,~qui~ements

of Section 706 (f) (1)

of

t ' i t l e. .

V,. ;[.I

:r.·' . ·,~f';:;:-t=he, ~_....

.G

d.
w.

v

i

l

•

\
Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-S (f) (1) .

Dated: _

_~ ~ "'-" I . 't

! 4-

I ~ ~ C6

EQDAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 ~ Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOUR
WESTERN DIVISION

Aileen Villanueva,

Plaintiff,

and

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,

Plaintiff-Intervenor, v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 97-1607-CV-W-SOW

Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership, Robert Norcross and Denny Barnett,

Defendants.

AMENDED CONSENT DECREE

Introduction

Aileen Villanueva represents a class of all persons of

Filipino race, national origin and ancestry employed by defendant

Woodbine Health Care Limited Partnership ("Woodbine") on H1A

visas between NQvember 20, 1993 and October 31, 1998, in

connection with Woodbine's Attestations filed with the United

States Department of Labor ("DOL") and Woodbine's Petitions filed

with the United States Department of Justice, Immigration and

Naturalization Service ("DOJ/INS"). This class excludes those

1

•

persons who have previously released and settled their claims for the described time period. All known class members are listed on Exhibit A. With consent of the parties, the Court certified this class by Order dated M~H ~)~. The claims of this class are that Defendants intentionally discriminated against them in a pattern and practice of discrimination on the basis of race, ancestry and national origin with respect to assignments, compensation, classification, firing and other terms and conditions of emploYment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e ~ seq. ("Title VII") and Section 1981, 42 U.S.C. Section 1981.
Plaintiff-Intervenor, the Equal EmploYment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), intervened in this action charging ~efendant Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership with violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991. The Commission claims that Defendant engaged in unlawful emploYment practices on the basis of national origin, and discriminated against Plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, Marie Lansangan, and a class of Filipino persons because of their national origin. The claimed unlawful practices include: (1) failing to employ' Villanueva, Lansangan, and other Filipino employees in positions as Registered Nurses; (2) failing to compensate them as Registered Nurses; and (3) harassing and
2

intimidating Villanueva, Lansangan, and other Filipino employees because of their national origin.
For purposes of settlement and compromise only, the parties have advised the Court that they wish to resolve the instant controversy without the expense, delay, and burden of further litigation. In connection with this settlement, defendant Woodbine contends that the paYments made by it in this action through the irrevocable escrow agreement are made in the conduct of defendant Woodbine's trade or business and that such paYments are ordinary and necessary expenses of the defendant.
The Parties agree that this Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of and the Parties to this lawsuit. The Parties further agree that this Decree is voluntarily entered into by the ~arties, and that this Decree, once it is finally approved by the Court, is final and binding upon the Parties, their successors and assigns. By entering into this Decree defendants do not admit liability to any plaintiff, and do not admit the truth of the plaintiffs' allegations in their Complaints.
The Parties agree that this Decree fairly resolves the issues alleged in this lawsuit, and that its entry shall further the purposes of Title VII and Section 1981.
The Parties desire that the Court preliminarily approve this Decree pending final approval pursuant to notice to interested
3

parties and a fairness hearing (the "Fairness Hearing") as provided in Section V of this Decree. Upon preliminary approval, and pending final approval, the Parties will begin taking certain actions as set forth in Section II of this Decree.
NOW THEREFORE, it is the preliminary finding of this Court, made on the pleadings and on the record as a whole and upon agreement of the parties, that: (I) this Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action; (ii) the requirements and purposes of Title VII and Section 1981 will be served by the implementation of this Decree; (iii) this Decree is intended to and does resolve all matters in controversy in this lawsuit among the parties; and (iv) the terms of this Decree constitute a fair and equitable settlement of all issues in this Qawsuit. This Court will make further findings, and may finally approve this Decree, following notice to interested persons as provided herein and a Fairness Hearing to be held on June 4, 1999, at the hour of 9:00 a.m.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, DECREED AND ADJUDGED AS FOLLOWS: I. General Provisions
1. Defendant Woodbine is permanently enjoined from discriminating against any employee or applicant with respect to job assignment, compensation, or any terms or conditions of emplOYment on the basis of national origin.
4

2. Defendant Woodbine is permanently enjoined from discriminating or retaliating against any person because he or she has opposed any practices alleged in this action to be unlawful under Title VII, has participated in an investigation or proceeding under Title VII, or because he or she has participated in this lawsuit or has benefitted in any way as a result of this Decree.
3. For the purposes of this Decree, the Commission's Title VII "class" members and plaintiffs' Title VII and Section 1981 classes shall include all persons of Filipino race, national origin and ancestry employed by defendant Woodbine Health Care Limited Partnership on RIA visas between November 20, 1993 and October 31, 1998 in connection with Woodbine's Attestations filed with the United States Department of Labor and Woodbine's Petitions filed with the United States Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, who have not previously released and settled their claims for the described time period. All known Title VII and Section 1981 "class" members for whom the Commission and Aileen Villanueva sought relief are listed on Exhibit A.
II. Relief for Class Members A. Defendants shall pay the gross sum of $2,100,000.00 ("Settlement Fund") for the use and benefit of the class members
5

and class counsel, Anderson & Associates, L.L.C., as provided in this Section II. Woodbine's duty under this provision will be fulfilled by providing American National Bank with a letter, jointly signed by the depositor to the "Irrevocable Escrow Agreement dated 12/30/98 to American National Bank and Trust Co. of Chicago" ("escrow agreement"), counsel for the Commission and class counsel. This letter will direct the Bank to assign the monies irrevocably deposited pursuant to the Escrow Agreement including all interest earned from and after February 16, 1999, to Baird, Kurtz and Dobson to be distributed for the benefit of the class at the direction of counsel for the Commission and class counsel. Woodbine shall not make any withdrawals from this fund. Woodbine agrees to provide the Commission and counsel for the plaintiff with all periodic bank statements regarding this account until it is assigned to Baird, Kurtz and Dobson, who shall thereafter provide all periodic bank statements to counsel for the Commission and class counsel.
B. Within fifteen (15) days after preliminary approval of this Decree, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall forward to each class member listed on Exhibit A a copy of the Notice of Fairness Hearing and Release of Claims included as Exhibit B. Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall bear the costs associated with this mailing. Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall preserve each letter
6

returned as undeliverable, and shall promptly notify counsel for all parties of the name and last known address of each person whose letter was returned undeliverable. The parties shall cooperate in efforts to locate each such class member. If, ninety (90) days after the letters have been returned as undeliverable, the parties are unsuccessful in locating any class member, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall forward copies of communications returned undeliverable to counsel for the parties.
c. Within 30 days after the Court grants final approval of
this Decree, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall forward to each class member who returns the release contained in Exhibit B three checks made payable to that person, one in the total net amount of backpay listed in Exhibit C, one in the total gross amount of 'interest on backpay, and one in the total gross amount of compensatory damages.
1. From each such amount designated and agreed by the parties to be backpay as shown in Exhibit C, defendants may withhold only mandatory deductions for the employee's portion of FICA, and deductions for federal, state and local income tax withholdings at the rate reflected on that class member's last W-4. No deductions may be made from the amounts designated as compensatory damages and interest on backpay. Baird,
7

Kurtz and Dobson shall issue separate 1099 forms for the compensatory damage amount and the interest on backpay amount. D. Along with the checks referred to in paragraph C above, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall also forward a statement of all deductions to each class member. All costs and fees of Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall be borne by defendants. E. If, six months after the date this decree is approved by the Court, any money remains in the Settlement Fund, either because class members have not been located or have refused to accept paYment, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall pay the balance to a charitable organization proposed by counsel for the Commission and counsel for the plaintiffs and approved by the Court. Any ~onies that have not been disbursed for reasons other than failure to locate a class member or refusal of a class member to accept the amount, shall be disbursed at the direction of the Commission and class counsel. F. Within thirty (30) days after this decree is finally approved by the Court, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall tender to Anderson & Associates, L.L.C. a check from the settlement fund in an amount as may be approved by the Court, not to exceed $400,000.00, to which amount defendants have .no objection, as and for the attorney's fees for services rendered to the class
8

members. Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall issue a form 1099 for this amount to Anderson & Associates, L.L.C.
G. Within thirty (30) days after this decree is finally approved by the Court, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall tender to Anderson & Associates, L.L.C. a check for an amount not to exceed $30,000.00, which amount shall be paid from the settlement fund, after Anderson & Associates' submission to the Court of any invoices and other documents reflecting actual paYment of those costs. This check shall represent reimbursement for costs expended by Anderson & Associates, L.L.C. in prosecuting this lawsuit.
H. Along with the check and statement of deductions referred to in paragraphs C and D above, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson ~hall send each person whose name is listed on Exhibit A a letter in the form appended hereto as Exhibit D. Each such letter, Exhibit D, shall be signed by Emanuel Binstock on behalf of Defendant Woodbine. Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall forward a copy of each such letter to counsel for the parties within 30 days after it is sent to each person whose name appears on Exhibit A.
I. Defendant Woodbine agrees that as a part of this settlement, it agreed, and has fully complied with its agreement, to pre-pay by December 31, 1998 all the monies it previously agreed to pay over a three year term to the Department of Labor,
9

for a total of $700,000.00, as and for back wages to the persons whose names are listed on Exhibit A, and penalties. Defendant Woodbine agrees to furnish proof of this payment to the Commission within 30 days after preliminary approval of this decree.
III. Reporting and Record-Keeping A. Woodbine shall provide the information described in Section II A within five business days of receiving it from the financial institution selected.
IV. Ter.m and Effect of Decree A. This Decree shall be for a period of two years and shall be extended for good cause shown. During the Decree's term the Court shall retain jurisdiction of this cause for purposes of monitoring Defendants' compliance with its terms, including issuing such orders as may be required to effectuate its purposes. Upon motion of the parties and a certification that all the terms of this decree have been complied with, this Court shall dismiss all claims by the Commission and the plaintiff in this action with prejudice.
V. FAIRNESS HEARING A. The Court shall conduct a hearing on the fairness of this Decree on June 4, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. B. If any class member wishes to object to the entry of
10

this Decree, the objector must file with the Court a detailed, written statement of the objection and promptly send copies to the Parties within the earlier of 1 month of receipt of the Notice of Fairness Hearing or at least 30 days prior to the Fairness Hearing.
C. The Parties may file a written position statement on any objections at least 10 days prior to the Fairness Hearing.
f'
11

FOR DEFENDANT WOODBINE HEALTHCARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
..
by:~
FOR DEFENDANT ROBERT NORCROSS FOR DEF~NDANT DENNY BARNETT
ATTORNEYS FOR D~FENDANTS
12

FOR PLAINTIFF VILLANUEVA

;/~rz

0;--

;\.. .~I7ZV?I ;LAENUEE.VAN J

~

FOR PLAINTIFF INTERVENOR EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
C. GREGORY STEWART GENERAL COUNSEL
ROBERT G. JOHNSON Regional Attorn
DONNA L. HARPER Senior Trial Attorney
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1222 Spruce, Room 8.100 St. Louis, MO 63103
JERRY SHORT MoBar No. 26318 Assistant U.S. Attorney 1201 Walnut, Suite 2300 Kansas City, MO 64106

13

,. SO ORDERED: PRELIMINARILY APPROVED:
-----it!l~ ~ I ~~
date EXHIBIT A - List of Class Members EXHIBIT B - Notice (Part I)
- Release to Employees (Part II) EXHIBIT C - List of backpay, interest and compensatory damages EXHIBIT D - Letter of Apology
14

EXHIBIT A

CLASS MEMBERS

1. Lanie (Aberlarde) Bowling 2128 S. Norton Avenue Independence,~O 64052

2. Nester Abreu
8817 W. 106th Terrace Overland Park, Kansas 66212

3. Eubigilda Acejo
5647 Quinn Street Bell Gardens, CA 90202

4. Cecil Aparicio
27415 S. Greenfield, Apt. 8 Southfield, MI 48076

5. Riza Arancillo
2817 E. 39th Street
Kansas City, ~O 64128

6. Rizaldy Atienza
108 Powell Blvd., Apt. 2-201 Daytona Beach, FL 32114

7.

~aria Judy Bermejo

2253

NE

71

51 ,

#E

Kansas City, ~O 64118

8.

~ary Ann Bermejo

7044 N. Olive, #f

Gladstone, ~O 64119

9. Armando Carinugan
3228 Normandy Wood Drive, Apt. F Ellicott City, ~aryland 21043

10. ~ildred Caro #1 Park Hollow Road, #38 Port Jefferson, NY 11777

I

11. Esther Castro 16759 W. 157th Terrace Olathe, Kansas 66062
12. Analyn Cezar 341 Hickory Hollow Terrace Antioch, 'IN 37013
13. Sandra Ching 7014 N. Park, #F Gladstone, MO 64118
14. Angstocia Cobangbang 3509 Lake Avenue, Apt. 2070 Columbia, SC 29206
15. Doreen (Juan) Collado 1317 E. 101st Street Kansas City. MO 64131
16. Jocelyn Cruz 7014 N. Park, #F Gladstone, MO 64118
17. Maria Cruz . 2207 Silver Court Overland Park, KS 66106
18. Maryjo Custudio 2400 NE 68th Street, #8 Gladstone, MO 64118
19. Edwin Dacasin 7014 N. Park, #F Gladstone, MO 64118
20. Rose Marie (Martin) Dayandante 601 Bill France Blvd., Apt. 1608 Daytona Beach, FL 32114
21. Julius Dayandante 601 Bill France Blvd. Daytona Beach, FL 32114
2

22. Karlo DeGuzman 101 South Bent Tree Drive, unit 61 Daytona Beac~ FL 32114

23. Marivic Del Fierro 6500 E. Ridge, #79 Odessa, TX 79762

24. Rowena DeMateo 2253 Northeast 71 51 Street
Gladstone, MO 64118

25. Dominick Dimacale 3861 Birchview Court Las Vegas, NV 89147

26. Maria (Monette) Falgui 2070 Lockhaven Road West Broomfield, MI 48324

27. Rubeth Fernandez 7029 N. Olive, #A Gladstone, MO 64118

28. Maria Christina Gasalao

27315 S. Greenfield, Apt. 8

of'

Southview,MI 48076

29. RissaGaufo 6922 N. Park, #E Gladstone, MO 64118

30. Nancy Gayagoy 420 E. 13 Mile, Apt. 102 Madison Heights, MI 48071

31. Marifel Gayyed 1012-3 Ancestry Drive Fayetville, NC 28304

32. Vincent Genabe 108 Powell Blvd., Apt. 2-201 Daytona Beac~ FL 32114

3

33. EnninGozon 704 North Parkway Gladstone, MO 64118
34. Jannette Hamac-Marshall 1703 Patricia Drive Kearney, MO 64060
35. Medarda Ignacio 3831 Whispering Way Drive SE Apt. 202 Grand Rapids, MI 49546
36. Lilibeth Irisari 2801 Kendallwood Parkway, #2 Gladstone, MO 64119
37. Maria Concepcion (Piduca) Juram 173 Durian Street Vista, CA 92083
38. Erlinda Lafuente 27315 S. Greenfield, Apt. 8 Southfield, MI 48076
39. Lorena Layos . 2253 NE 71 st St. Kansas City, MO 64118
40. Gracita Leonzon 507 NW 55th Street, #8 Gladstone, MO 64118
41. Rene Magsino 7046 N. Olive, #F Gladstone, MO 64118
42. Jocelyn Malagar . 2348 NE 70th St., Apt. 8
Kansas City, MO 64118
43. Janet Mamigo 7027 North Olive, #F Kansas City, MO 64118
4

44. Mary Rose Marquez 7004 N. Olive, #C Gladstone, MO 64118
45. MaryAnn Martinez 637 W. 43rd Terrace Kansas City, MO 64111
46. Medilaida Medina 511 S. Clairbome, #207 Olathe, KS 66062
47. Felix. Mendoza 2043 Vantage Street Woodridge, TIL 60517
48. Nellie Miguel 2120 Pisgah road Perry, FL 33347
49. Virginia Morales 1201 WestBurrow, Apt. B-21 Grandbury, TX 76048
f50. FebeNavas 5219 NE 63rd Street Kansas City, MO 64119
51. Pat Nohay 3228 Normandy Wood Drive, Apt. F Ellicott City, Maryland 21043
52. Harriet Pamplona 44086 Bassar Street Canton, MI 48188
53. Shulamite Parayno 1201 WestBurrow, Apt. B-21 Grandbury, TX 76048
54. Abner Pasinos 34840 Pisces Drive, Apt. C Sterling Heights, MI 48310
5

55. Catherine Pelino 1451 Creekside Drive, #1105 Walnut Creek, CA 94596

56. Maria Perez 7044 N. Olive, Apt. F Gladstone, MO 64118

57. LaLaine (Awiten) Poras 4405 NW Hon Drive, Apt. F Kansas City, MO 64150

58. Marigold (Garland) Santos 778 Jimmy Ann Drive, Apt. 1612 Daytona Beach, FL 32114

59. Jessie Sinosa 2400 NE 68th Street, #8
Gladstone, MO 64118

60. Armine Tengco 1255 Hays Street, #18 San Leandro, CA 94577

61. Maria Jocelyn Valderrama

f ..

1625 Quintara Street

. San Francisco, CA 94116

62. Genmaria Vergara 7046 N. Olive, #C Gladstone, MO 64118

63. Jocelyn (Estacio) Villamayor 9849 Failfish Terrace Gaitheisburg, Maryland 20879

64. Aileen Villanueva 4508 N. Locust Kansas City, MO 64116

65. Arlene (Guiriba) Vitug 5019 NE 63rd Street
Kansas City, MO 64119

6

EXHIBIT B (PART 1 OF 2 PARTS)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION

Aileen Villanueva,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

and

)

)

Equal Employment Opportunity

)

Commission,

)

)

Plaintiff-Intervenor,

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO.

v.

)

97-1607-CV-W-SOW

)

Woodbine Healthcare Limited

)

Partnership, Robert Norcross

)

and Denny Barnett,

)

)

_ _ _ _ _ _..IoDo!.Se;c...fl...le""'nl...l..>.dd..lOla.n..u..t...s . ~

)

NOTICE TO ELIGIBLE CLAIMANTS OF PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE

To: Former Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership Employee: On December 15, 1997, Aileen Villanueva ("Villanueva") filed
her Complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri alleging that Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership ("Woodbine"), Denny Barnett, and Robert Norcross intentionally discriminated against her and all other Filipino nationals working for Woodbine under the H1A visa program because of race, ancestry and national origin with respect to
1

assignments, compensation, classification, firing and other terms and conditions of employment in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Section 2000e ~ seq. ("Title VII") and 42 U.S.C. Section 1981 ("Section 1981"). Villanueva subsequently moved to certify a class of Filipino persons whose claims of discrimination were similar to her own.
While Villanueva's request was pending before the Court, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("the Commission") intervened in her lawsuit. The Commission claimed that Woodbine engaged in a pattern and practice of discrimination by intentionally discriminating against Filipino HIA employees on the basis of national origin by paying them less than U.S. registered nurses, assigning them to work in less skilled jobs as ~ides and technicians, threatening them with discharge and ultimately deportation if they complained of their treatment, and otherwise treating them differently, in violation of Title VII. You have been sent this notice because the Commission, Villanueva and Woodbine believe you are a Filipino who worked at Woodbine under the HIA visa program between November 23, 1993 and October 31, 1998.
THIS NOTICE IS TO ADVISE YOU THAT YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO RECEIVE RELIEF UNDER THE TERMS OF A PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE IF YOU TAKE CERTAIN STEPS OUTLINED BELOW.
2

THERE WILL BE A FAIRNESS HEARING ON THE PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE before the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. The Consent Decree was negotiated by attorneys for the EEOC, Villanueva and the proposed class, Woodbine, Barnett and Norcross. The attorneys for all the parties believe that it is in the best interests of the parties to avoid the costs, uncertainty and delay of further litigation. They agreed, therefore, to a settlement, the terms of which they believe are fair and just. The terms are specifically spelled out in the Consent Decree. This notice explains those terms generally.
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY. IN ORDER FOR YOU TO BE PAID ANY MONEY AND TO RECEIVE AN APOLOGY FROM WOODBINE, YOU MUST RETURN THE RELEASE OF CLAIMS ENCLOSED WITH THIS NOTICE TO BAIRD, KURTZ and DOBSON, City Center Square, 1100 Main Street, #2700, Kansas City, MO 64105-2112, Attn: M. Bruce McKittrick, phone (816) 221-6300, by May 3, 1999.
I. SUMMARY OF THE TERMS OF THE CONSENT DECREE
The terms of the proposed settlement are contained in the Consent Decree given preliminary approval by the Court on March 8, 1999. This Notice is intended as a summary only. The Consent Decree can be reviewed at the office of the Clerk of the Court, located at 400 East Ninth Street, Kansas City, Missouri, 64106.
3

Copies may obtained by visiting or calling the Clerk, or by requesting a copy from the Administrator, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson, although a copying charge may be requested.
A. The proposed Consent Decree provides, in part, as follows:
1. Woodbine has agreed to pay $2,100,000.00 (the "Settlement Fund") for backpay, interest, compensatory damages, attorney's fees and costs.
2. Woodbine agreed to send each Filipino RIA employee a letter of apology expressing its deep regret for any offensive conduct committed by its managers, supervisors and administrators, including being mis-assigned into lower paying and less responsible positions.
3 . Woodbine agreed to pay for a third party administrator, Baird, Kurtz and Dobson, who will manage the administrative steps required for the settlement to take effect, including sending this notice, sending out paYments, calculating the taxes and withholding amounts, issuing the W-2's and form 1099's, and keeping records of its actions.
4. The court may award attorney's fees to Anderson &
4

Associates, L.L.C. in an amount not to exceed $400,000.00. This money will be subtracted from the.settlement fund. 5. The court may award an additional sum of approximately $30,000.00 to Anderson & Associates, L.L.C. to reimburse it for the costs of the case, including deposition transcripts, court reporters, travel expenses, photocopy charges and the like. 6. Woodbine agreed to accelerate its payments, previously spread over a three-year period, and instead to pay all money owing under a settlement with the United States Department of Labor. These payments total an additional $700,000.00 in backpay and penalties. $675,000.00 of this total is backpay for the class. Woodbine agrees to provide evidence of this accelerated payment within 30 days of the decree's approval by the court. 7. Woodbine is permanently prohibited from discriminating against any employee or applicant with respect to job assignment, compensation, or any terms or conditions of employment on the basis of national origin.
5

8. Woodbine is permanently prohibited from

discriminating or retaliating against any person

because he or she has opposed any practices

alleged in this lawsuit to be unlawful under Title

VII, has participated in an investigation or

proceeding under Title VII, or because he or she

has participated in this lawsuit or has benefitted

in any way as a result of this Decree. This means

Woodbine has made a commitment not to retaliate

against members of the Class who obtain relief

pursuant to the Consent Decree.

9. Baird, Kurtz and Dobson will provide each member

of the Class with appropriate W-2 and 1099 forms

f

for payments received under the decree.

10. If after six months following the Court's approval

of this decree, there is any money that is

unclaimed because a class member cannot be located

or has not claimed the money or completed a

release, the remaining money will go to a charity

approved by the Court.

B. The Commission did not seek reimbursement of its costs

and attorneys' fees.

c. Calculation of Payments

6

1. BACKPAY: The dollar amount that each class member is

entitled to for backpay was calculated by the Commission, which

generally followed the following steps:

a.

averaging the actual annual hourly wage rates

paid by Woodbine to each u.s. registered nurse it

employed each year from 1993 to 1995;

b. finding the actual number of hours each class

member actually worked each year from 1993 to 1995;

c. multiplying the annual hours of each class member
each year by the average wage actually paid u.s.

registered nurses;

d. subtracting the actual annual pay of each class

member from the salary each class member would have

earned if Woodbine had paid each at the same rate as it
paid its u.s. registered nurses;

e. subtracting the actual backpay that each class

member was paid under the terms of the settlement with

the Department of Labor.

2. INTEREST was calculated on the entire amount of backpay

owing, including the backpay recovered by the Department of

Labor.

3. COMPENSATORY DAMAGES are compensation for pain,

suffering, humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety and loss of

7

enjoyment of life resulting from the claims made in this lawsuit. The total compensatory damages will be the net amount in the settlement fund after payment of backpay, interest, attorney's fees and costs. That net amount is approximately $1,100,000.00. In general, compensatory damages will be distributed to each class member based on length of employment. Each person will receive at least one share of compensatory damages. A share is valued at approximately $1,200.00. Each class member will receive one share for each month of employment. For example, a class member with five months' employment will receive five shares, with an approximate value of $6,000.00; a class member with 10 months employment will receive approximately $12,000.00.
4. PREMIUMS will be paid in the amount of $2,500.00 each ~o MaryAnne Martinez and Marigold Santos Garland for their efforts and assistance in the prosecution of this lawsuit.
5. A PREMIUM will be paid to named plaintiff Aileen Villanueva in the amount of $10,000.00 for her efforts and the risks she undertook to prosecute this lawsuit, and in consideration for her dismissal of her separate action now pending in the u.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri.
6. PRIVATE plaintiff Doreen Juan will also be paid a premium of.$2,500.00, in addition to her other recovery of backpay, interest and compensatory damages provided in the
8

decree, as consideration for her dismissal of her lawsuit now pending in Jackson County Circuit Court.
7. Attached is Exhibit C to the Decree, showing the proposed backpay, interest and compensatory damages the parties estimate that each class member will be paid under the Decree's terms. The actual amount of backpay will be less than the amounts shown because of mandatory deductions for the employee share of F.I.C.A. and other federal, state and local taxes. The actual amounts of compensatory damages may be different from the amounts shown, depending on the amount in the settlement fund after paYment of fees and expenses, and the number of claimants. The Commission estimates that these figures shown are close to the actual recovery that will be available to each class member who executes a release of claims form.
II. OBTAINING MONETARY PAYMENTS
A. Submission of Release of Claims You should have received with this Notice a "Release of
Claims Form". If you did not receive a release, please contact
Baird, Kurtz and Dobson, City Center Square, 1100 Main Street, #2700, Kansas City, Missouri 64105-2212, Attn: M. Bruce McKittrick, 816-221-6300 immediately and provide
updated information. It is your obligation to keep Baird, Kurtz
9

and Dobson informed of your current address. If you want to be eligible for any paYments under the Consent Decree, YOU MUST COMPLETE AND RETURN THE RELEASE OF CLAIMS TO:

Baird, Kurtz and Dobson City Center Square 1100 Main Street, #2700 Kansas City, MO 64105-2112 Attn: M. Bruce McKittrick

THE RELEASE OF CLAIMS MUST BE RECEIVED BY BAIRD, KURTZ AND

DOBSON BY MAY 3, 1999 IN ORDER FOR YOU TO OBTAIN ANY RELIEF

PURSUANT TO THE CONSENT DECREE. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOU

RETURN THE RELEASE OF CLAIMS BY CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT

REQUESTED. YOUR FAILURE TO SUBMIT A TIMELY RELEASE OF CLAIMS

SHALL DISQUALIFY YOU FROM THE RECEIPT OF ANY RELIEF UNDER THE

CONSENT DECREE. IF THE CONSENT DECREE IS APPROVED BY THE COURT,

MAKING AN OBJECTION TO THE DECREE WILL NOT AFFECT YOUR RELIEF

UNDER THE DECREE PROVIDED YOU RETURN THE RELEASE OF CLAIMS BY MAY

3, 1999. If you did not receive this Notice by mail, or if your

home address changes after you receive this Notice, you should

contact Baird, Kurtz and Dobson at the address above.

III.

FAIRNESS HEARING

A. THE COURT WILL CONDUCT A HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FAIRNESS OF THE CONSENT DECREE AT 9:00 a.m. ON JUNE 4, 1999, IN THE COURTROOM OF THE HONORABLE SCOTT O. WRIGHT, UNITED STATES

10

COURTHOUSE, COURTROOM 8E, 400 East Ninth Street, KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 64106. Your presence is not required in order to be eligible for payment under the decree. If you wish to object to any portion of the decree, however, you must either appear personally or through an attorney, or submit your objections in writing if you are not able to attend personally, in order to inform the Court of your objections, if any, to the Consent Decree. If you believe that the settlement is not fair, just and reasonable, you may submit your statement of objection to the Clerk, U.S. District Court, 400 East Ninth Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. At the top of your written statement, you must set forth the following: "Villanueva and EEOC v. Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership, Robert Norcross and Denny Barnett, Case No. 97-1607-CV-W-SOW, Objection to Proposed Consent Decree". You must ma~l or deliver the original and one copy of your written statement by MAY 3, 1999. At the time you file the original and one copy of your written statement with the Court, you must also mail another copy to each of the following:
Donna L. Harper Senior Trial Attorney Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1222 Spruce, Room 8.100 St. Louis, MO 63103 Karen R. Glickstein Foland & Wickens, P.C. 1500 Kansas City Place
11

1200 Main Street Kansas City, MO 64105
Denise M. Anderson Anderson and Associates 305 The Stillwell 104 West Ninth Kansas City, MO 64105
Baird, Kurtz and Dobson City Center Square 1100 Main Street, #2700 Kansas City, MO 64105-2112 Attn: M. Bruce McKittrick
You may object to the Consent Decree and still be eligible
for benefits under the Consent Decree. If the Court hears your
objection, but does not modify the Consent Decree based upon your
objection, you will be eligible for relief under the Consent
Decree as long as you submitted the Release of Claims by MAY 3,
1999 .
. B. The Court will exclude class member from this
settlement class if requested by the class or his or her attorney
not later than MAY 3, 1999.
C. The judgment in this lawsuit will include all· class
members who do not request exclusion in accordance with paragraph
III B above.
D. Any class member who does not request exclusion may, if
the class member desires, enter an appearance through counsel.
IV. DISTRIBUTION OF MONETARY RELIEF
12

The payments that Woodbine is required to make under the Consent Decree will not be distributed to you until after the fairness hearing and the Court's final approval of the Consent Decree. Thus, we anticipate that you will not receive payments before JULy 5, 1999. Please be patient.
v. QUESTIONS
If you have any questions regarding the subject of this Notice, do not contact the Judge, the Clerk of the Court, or the Company. Instead, please contact Baird, Kurtz and Dobson, M. Bruce McKittrick at the address and phone number above.
13

EXHIBIT B (pART 2 of2 PARTS)

RELEASE OF CLAIMS

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _" Social Security No.

, ("Class

Member"), has received a Notice to Eligible Claimants ofProposed Consent Decree in

connection with a Consent Decree ("Consent Decree'') between Woodbine Health Care Limited

Partnership ("Woodbine"), Denny Barnett, Robert Norcross, and the Equal Employment

Opportunity Commission ("Commission") entered on

, 1999 by the United States

Court for the Western District ofMissouri in Case No. 97-1607-CV-W-SOW.

As a requirement ofparticipating in the benefits under the terms ofthe Consent Decree,

to which the Class Member would not otherwise be entitled, the sufficiency of which is hereby

acknowledged, on the Class Member's own behalf and on behalfofthe Class Member's heirs

and assigns and all persons claiming under the Class Member, the Class Member hereby fully

and forever unconditionally releases and discharges Defendant Woodbine (including each of its

pa.rh'lers: FHC Woodbine, Inc., BFP Limited Partnership, Woodbine General Corporation,

Emanual Binstock, Michael Gilman, Joyce Shapiro, Larry Schwartz, and Sheldon Neidich), First

Health Care Associates Ltd., First Health Care Associates, FHC Enterprises, Inc., Woodbine

Associates, Woodbine Healthcare and Rehabilitation Centre, BNB, OMI, Highbrey, Denny

Barnett and Robert Norcross, and their agents, employees, heirs, assigns, successors or

predecessors in interest, officers, directors, shareholders, and representatives (collectively the

"Releasees"), from any and all liability, actions, claims and demands whatsoever, asserted or

unasserted, known or unknown, present or future, either in law or in equity, and whether based

on tort, contract, statute or other theory ofrecovery, arising from such Class Member's

application for employment at Defendant Woodbine and/or employment with Defendant

1

Woodbine for the period oftime between November 20, 1993 and October 31, 1998. Nothing in this Release shall be construed to affect the Class Member's opportunity to pursue claims directly against VIRPA, Virgilio Pagulayan, Nurse's Quarters, Inc. or Med Search International Incorporated.
The Class Member has been informed ofthe likely range of payment he or she will receive under the Consent Decree, as set forth in Exhibit C to the proposed Consent Decree, but understands the amount of money to be received is not finally determined. Based on this understanding, the Class Member acknowledges the Class Member will continue to be bound by this Release ofClaims and the Class Member shall never bring any claim described in the preceding paragraph against the Releasees, even if the Class Member does not receive payment under the Consent Decree in the amount the Class Member anticipates.
The Class Member and the Releasees understand they may later discover claims or facts now unknown or unsuspected, and the Class Member and the Releasees expressly assume all risk
...;,
that the facts and law concerning this Release of Claims and the Consent Decree may be other than as currently known to them. The Class Member acknowledges that, in signing this Release, the Class Member is not relying on any information provided to the Class Member by the Releasees with the exception ofthe length of employment and payroll information used to compute back wages and other damages.
The Class Member understands this Release is not an admission of liability by Releasees, but is only a means ofcompromising a dispute in light of the costs and uncertainties of litigation. The Class Member and the Releasees agree this Release will be construed under Missouri law and, ifpart ofthis Release of Claims is found invalid, the-remainder shall be enforceable.
2

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Class Member has read this Release of Claims and voluntarily signs it after having been advised to seek his or her own legal counsel, without threat or coercion, with full knowledge and understanding of its contents, and without promise of benefit, except as expressly described in this Release of Claims and the Notice to Eligible Claimants of Proposed Consent Decree. This Release ofClaims constitutes the entire agreement and merges all prior negotiations, discussions and promises. This Release of Claims will be enforceable if and when the Consent Decree is approved and entered by the Court and no successful appea\ is taken therefrom.
Execution ofthis Release of Claims does not prevent raising an objection to the Consent Decree. at the Fairness Hearing.
I certify under penalty ofperjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
3

Backpay, Interest and Compensatory Damages PRELIMINARY EXHIBIT C

NAME

BACKPAY AMOUNT

INTEREST

# OF MONTHS

COMPENSATORY DAMAGES

Aberlarde,

5,028.91

5,354.49

16

Lanie S.

19,200.00

Abreu, Nestor

2,557.92

2,347.23

6

7,200.00

Acejo,

3,065.67

3,150.32

10

Eubigilda C.

12,000.00

Aparicio, Cecil E.

3,543.14

3,549.69

10

12,000.00

Arancillo, Riza

0.00

6,445.22

17

20,400.00

Atienza, Rizaldy

2,250.34

4,003.89

10

12,000.00

Awiten, Lalaine

1,351.57

4,279.51

17

20,400.00

Bermejo, Mary

7,972.27

6,022.25

25

Judy L.

30,000.00

Bermejo, Mary

668.68

2,967.15

8

Ann

9,600.00

13uenavista,

2,145.34

2,487.05

8

Doreen

9,600.00

Carinungan,

8,639.72

5,947.79

15

Armando

18,000.00

Carol Mildred

3,549.83

3,745.48

10

12,000.00

Castro, Esther

2,709.77

2,843.33

6

7,200.00

Cezar, Analyn

528.70

2,886.57

9

10,800.00

Ching, Sandra

261. 76

237.18

1

1,200.00

CobangBang, Anastacia

785.98

3,997.08

12

14,400.00

Cruz, Jocelyn

344.27

354.48

2

2,400.00

Cruz, Maria

344.27

354.48

2

2,400.00

Custodio, Marijo R.

3,952.67

6,704.63

25

30,000.00

Dacasin, Edwin

303.84

317.35

2

2,400.00

Backpay, Interest and Compensatory Damages PRELIMINARY EXHIBIT C

NAME

BACKPAY AMOUNT

INTEREST

# OF MONTHS WORKED

COMPENSATORY DAMAGES

Dayandante, Julius

218.65

3,769.44

9

10,800.00

De Guzman, Karlo A.

358.19

2,538.92

9

10,800.00

Del Fierro,

3,895.74

3,819.51

8

Marivic D.

9,600.00

De Mateo, Rowena

8,552.01

8,365.83

25

30,000.00

Dimacale, Dominick

6,903.98

8,061.11

26

31,200.00

Falgui, Maria

538.52

3,153.22

12

Fernandez, Rubeth V.

9,247.22

6,344.42

25

Garland,

3,397.66

7,751.78

13

Marigold H.

Gasalo, Mary

2,370.33

3,402.73

10

'Christina

14,400.00 30,000.00 15,600.00 12,000.00

Gaufo, Rissa

5,172.44

4,422.08

10

Gayagoy, Nancy B.

0.00

2,907.83

8

Gayyed, Marifel I.

7,168.06

5,993.76

16

Genabe, Vincent B.

467.64

2,977.28

11

Gozan, Ermin

1,113.60

456.90

1

Hamac, Jannette

5,897.72

6,688.58

24

Ignacio,

5,373.10

7,074.28

17

Medarda G.

Irisari,

7,441.19

7,929.59

25

Lilibeth o.

Lafuente,

3.020.84

3,353.12

10

Erlinda L.

12,000.00 9,600.00
19,200.00 13,200.00
1,200.00 28,800.00 20,400.00 30,000.00 12,000.00

Backpay, Interest and Compensatory Damages PRELIMINARY EXHIBIT C

NAME

BACKPAY AMOUNT

INTEREST

# OF MONTHS WORKED

COMPENSATORY DAMAGES

Layos, Lorena

7,227.68

7,519.06

25

30,000.00

Leonzon, Gracita B.

7,697.99

6,819.86

29

34,800.00

Magsino, Rene

2,077.63

5,824.91

10

Malagar, Jocelyn O.

5,946.34

7,333.59

26

12,000.00 31,200.00

Mamigo, Janet

4,552.72

4,857.07

12

Marquez, Maryrose R.

544.30

3,762.83

12

14,400.00 14,400.00

Martin, Rosemarie R.

17.04

3,012.90

13

15,600.00

Martinez, Mary Ann

2,326.00

2,523.07

7

8,400.00

Medina,

2,651.51

3,174.67

7

Medilaida

8,400.00

Mendoza, Felix
~c'
'Miguel, Nellie D.

9,553.60

3,809.93

7

1,111.22

4,312.04

12

8,400.00 14,400.00

Morales,

3,302.09

3,279.22

9

Virginia D.

10,800.00

Navas, Febe

3,712.14

5,011.38

33

39,600.00

Nohay, Pat

742.90

3,267.59

10

12,000.00

Pamplona, Harriet B.

4,995.90

5,717.85

24

28,800.00

Parayno,

2,988.05

4,109.43

11

Shulamite A.

13,200.00

Pasinos, Abner R.

2,659.51

3,285.44

9

10,800.00

Pelino,

3,572.62

4,042.19

11

Catherine T.

13,200.00

Perez, Maria

727.33

3,139.52

9

10,800.00

Piduca, Ma. Concepcion

388.57

3,170.64

11

31,200.00

Backpay, I:nter.est and Compensatory Damages PRELIMIN~RY EXHIBIT C

NAME

BACKPAY AMOUNT

INTEREST

# OF MONTHS WORKED

COMPENSATORY DAMAGES

Sinosa, Jessie P.

5,378.27

5,285.12

25

30,000.00

Valderrama,

258.85

1,222.14

9

Jocela

10,800.00

Vergara,

2,032.13

5,058.48

27

Gemmarie T.

32,400.00

Villamayor, Jocelyn E.

447.75

2,118.71

12

14,400.00

Villanueva,

4,647.59

6,606.76

16

Aileen M.

19,200.00

Vitug, Arlene

0.00

193.16

3

3,600.00

EXHIBIT D

Woodbine/FHC Letterhead

date addressee

Dear (addressee),

We are writing to you personally in connection with the settlement of the lawsuit brought by Aileen Villanueva and the EEOC on your behalf.

We wish to personally express our deep regret for any offensive conduct by Woodbine's managers, supervisors and administrators such as was alleged in the Complaints filed on your behalf, including being mis-assigned into a lower-paying and less responsible position than that of a Registered Nurse, and being treated differently from the U.S. employees in other ways. Conduct such as has been alleged on your behalf does not reflect the principles on which we have hoped to operate our business, and we are sincerely sorry that it distressed you. We wish it could have been avoided.

While we cannot change the past, we hope to positively affect the present and the future. We want to stress to you that any conduct that caused you distress is not reflective of the values of Woodbine or its management. We have full confidence that-pur managers understand the respect and dignity to which ~ll ·our·· employees are entitled.

We wish you all ~he best, and sincerely hope that in settlin$"j

this matter, we have helped to erase some of the pain you felt

because of your emploYment by Woodbine Healthcare Center.

'I

.., "
Sincerely,

Emanuel Binstock

15

Case: 4:97-cv-01607
Donna L. Harper, Esq. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1222 Spruce St. 8th Floor, Room 8.100 St. Louis, MO 63103

 
 IN 'THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSQLTRI DIVISION

II MIN UTE'S H E E T ij

AILEEN VILLANUEVA
v.
WOODBINE HEALTHCARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, et al.

CASE NO: 97-1607-CV-W-SOW

DATE:

March 05, 1999

HON. SCOTT o. WRIGHT, Sr. Judge

PRESIDING

NATURE OF HEARING.:

Teleconference

TIME COMMENCED:

f- I,' .2.:2~ i71

TIME TERMINATED:

,

/I

, , " . APPEARENCES

PLAINTIFF

DEFNDANT

Donna Harper

Karen Glickstein·

Denise Anderson

Jennifer McCoy

A. Mason

OR IGJ NAL E.R.O.

C. Morrison

DEP./LAW

---------------------------- CLERK

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
WESTERN DIVISION

AILEEN VILLANUEVA, Individually and on behalf ofothers similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
and
EQUAL EMPLOYlvfENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
P laint iff-Intervenor,
v.
WOODBINE HEALTHCARE LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, et aI.
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 97-1607-CV-W-SOW

)

)

)

)

)

)

AMENDED STIPULATION OF CLASS CERTIFICATION, DEFINITION, CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AND CLASS COUNSEL

Plaintiff, individually and on behalfofothers similarly situated ("Plaintiffs"), and

Defendants Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership, Bob Norcross and Denny Barnett

("Defendants") stipulate and agree as follows:

L All ofthe requirements of Rule 23(a) and Rule 23(b)(3) have been satisfied with

respect to the maintenance of this action as a Class Action under subparagraph (b)(3) of Rule 23

solely for the purpose of considering acting upon a settlement of plaintiffs' claims under Title

VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and this action may be certified as a

Class Action on behalf of the Settlement Class, defined below.

2. For settlement purposes, this action shall be maintained as a Class Action on behalf of

the following class: All persons of Filipino race, national origin and ancestry employed by

defendant Woodbine Health Care Limited Partnership ("Woodbine") pursuant to H-IA visas

between and after November 20, 1993 through October 31, 1998 in connection with Woodbine's

; : :...... ! i " . ' . Ii

"

Attestations filed with the United States Depfu-tment of Labor and Woodbine's Petitions for a Nonimmigrant Worker filed with the United States Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service who have not previously settled and released their claims for the described time period.
3. For settlement purposes, Aileen Villanueva is the Class Representative for the Settlement Class.
4. The law fIrm Anderson & Associates, LLC and attorneys Denise M. Anderson and Jennifer H. McCoy, 305 The Stilwell, 104 West Ninth Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64105 represent the Settlement Class in this action as Class Counsel.
5. This Stipulation is contingent upon the parties agreeing to the terms and conditions of a Consent Decree, executing that Decree and the Court's approval of the Consent Decree.

FOLAND & WICKENS, P.e. ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC

tif1 r ~(1s,/e\

llYk
Anderson

~ n1.4/

Jelmifer H. McCoy

#37905

305 The Stilwell

104 West Ninth Street

~ City, Missouri 64105

(816) 472-1441

FAX (816) 472-4114

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy ofthe above and foregoing was deposited in the U.S. Mail, postage

prepaid, to Ms. DolUI1.ci Harper, Equal Employment .op~rt~ty Commission, 1222 Spruce Street, Ro~m 8.100, St. Louis, Missouri 63103 on this/th ~y of March, 1999..

~'iJjDC~

Atto y for Plaintiffs

.

 
 CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

PROTO, TERMED
U.S. District Court United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri (Kansas City)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:97-cv-01607-SOW

Villanueva v. Woodbine Healthcare, et al Assigned to: Judge Scott O. Wright Demand: $0 Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 12/15/1997 Date Terminated: 06/08/1999 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
Aileen Villanueva Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated

represented by Denise M. Anderson Polsinelli Shalton Flanigan Suelthaus PC-KCMO 700 West 47th Street Suite 1000 Kansas City, MO 64112-1802 (816) 753-1000 Fax: (816) 753-1536 Email: danderson@polsinelli.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jennifer H. Mccoy U.S. EEOC 400 State Ave. Ste. 905 Kansas City, KS 66101 (913) 551-6614 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership

represented by Karen R. Glickstein Shughart Thomson & Kilroy, PC-KCMO 120 West 12th Street Twelve Wyandotte Plaza Kansas City, MO 64105-1929 (816) 421-3355 Fax: (816) 374-0509 Email: kglickstein@stklaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

1 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report
Defendant Robert Norcross
Defendant Denny Barnett
2 of 11

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...
W. James Foland Foland, Wickens, Eisfelder, Roper & Hofer, PC Commerce Tower Building 911 Main Street 30th Floor Kansas City, MO 64105 (816)471-4622 Fax: (816)472-6262 Email: jfoland@fwpclaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
James C. Cox Foland & Wickens, P.C. 911 Main Street Commerce Tower Building, 29th Fl. Kansas City, MO 64105 (816) 472-7474 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Karen R. Glickstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
W. James Foland (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
James C. Cox (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Karen R. Glickstein (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
W. James Foland (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
James C. Cox (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

Intervenor
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Donna Harper SEDEY HARPER PC 3030 Grand Ave. Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63118 (314) 773-3566 Fax: (314) 773-3615 Email: dharper@sedeyharper.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jerry L. Short Assistant United States Attorney 400 E. 9th St. Room 5510 Kansas City, MO 64106 (816)426-3130 Fax: (816) 426-3165 Email: Jerry.Short@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 12/15/1997 12/15/1997 02/12/1998 03/05/1998
03/06/1998
03/18/1998

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT ( 0 Summons(es) issued) Receipt #138463 in the amt of $150.00 (Court Employee) (Entered: 12/16/1997)
2 Notice of Control Group Assignment (Early Assessment Program) (Court Employee) (Entered: 12/16/1997)
3 ANSWER by defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett (Court Employee) (Entered: 02/13/1998)
4 MINUTE ENTRY: Scheduling Conf as to plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett Judge Scott O. Wright; All parties present; plf will move f/class certification; hearing on class will be held in July; presiding Court Reporter: April Mason (Sealed Case User) (Entered: 03/06/1998)
5 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright plf will file a motion f/class certification by 4/20/98; it is further ordered that dft will file a response to the motion by 6/23/98; it is further ordered that any reply by the plf will be filed by 6/30/98; it is further ordered in-court hearing on a class certification will be held on 7/16/98 at 9:00 am (cc: all counsel) (Sealed Case User) (Entered: 03/06/1998)
6 MOTION by defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett to dismiss plt's complaint against them for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted (Court Employee) (Entered: 03/19/1998)

3 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

03/18/1998 03/31/1998 04/02/1998 04/14/1998 04/14/1998 04/17/1998 04/20/1998 04/20/1998 04/20/1998 04/23/1998 04/23/1998 04/27/1998 04/27/1998
04/27/1998 04/27/1998 04/27/1998

7 Suggestions by defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett in support of motion to dismiss plt's complaint against them for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted [6-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 03/19/1998)
8 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to extend time to oppose dfts' Norcorss and Barnett's Motion to Dismiss (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/01/1998)
9 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting plt's motion to extend time to oppose dfts' Norcorss and Barnett's Motion to Dismiss, on or before 4/16/98 [8-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/02/1998)
10 MOTION by proposed party EEOC to intervene (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/14/1998)
11 Suggestions by proposed party EEOC in support of motion to intervene [10-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/14/1998)
12 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to extend time within which to file objections to dfts Motion to Dismiss (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/17/1998)
13 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting plfs' motion to extend time within which to file objections to dfts Motion to Dismiss [12-1] on or before 4/23/98 (cc: all counsel) (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 04/20/1998)
14 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to Certify Class Action (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/21/1998)
15 Suggestions by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva in support of motion to Certify Class Action [14-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/21/1998)
16 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to amend class action complaint (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/24/1998)
17 Suggestions by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva in opposition to motion to dismiss plt's complaint against them for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted [6-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/24/1998)
18 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting plt's motion to amend class action complaint [16-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/27/1998)
19 MINUTE ENTRY Judge Scott O. Wright presiding #10 Motion to Intervene; discussed and ruling deferred; The hearings set for 7/16/98 will be reset upon oral motion; Order to follow , Court Reporter: A Mason (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/27/1998)
20 AMENDED COMPLAINT Number of summon(s): 0 (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/27/1998)
21 MOTION by defendant to extend time to reply to Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Motion for Leave to Intervene (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/28/1998)
22 Suggestions by defendant in support of motion to extend time to reply to Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Motion for Leave to Intervene [21-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/28/1998)

4 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

04/28/1998 04/28/1998 04/29/1998 04/29/1998
05/01/1998 05/05/1998
05/06/1998 05/06/1998
05/06/1998
05/11/1998 05/13/1998 05/13/1998 05/15/1998

23 MOTION by defendants to consolidate cases 97-1607-CV-W-SOW & 97-1221-CV-W-1 (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/28/1998)
24 Suggestions by defendants in support of motion to consolidate cases 97-1607-CV-W-SOW & 97-1221-CV-W-1 [23-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/28/1998)
25 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright in-court hearing regarding Class Certification is rescheduled for 7/14/98 9:00 (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/29/1998)
26 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting dft's motion to dismiss Norcross and Barnett from Count II (Title VII and MHRA) and denying dfts' Motion to Dismiss Norcross and Barnett from Count I (1981) [6-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/29/1998)
27 FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT Number of summon(s): 0 (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/01/1998)
28 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting dft's Woodbine, Norcross and Barnett's motion to extend time to reply to Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Motion for Leave to Intervene; Granting to and including 5/4/98 to file responses [21-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
29 Suggestions by proposed party EEOC in opposition to motion to consolidate cases 97-1607-CV-W-SOW & 97-1221-CV-W-1 [23-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/06/1998)
30 MOTION by defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett for reconsideration of the Court's Order denying dft's Motion to Dismiss and Granting Plt's Motion to Amend Complaint (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/07/1998)
31 Suggestions by defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett in support of motion for reconsideration of the Court's Order denying dft's Motion to Dismiss and Granting Plt's Motion to Amend Complaint [30-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/07/1998)
32 MINUTE ENTRY Judge Scott O. Wright presiding in-court hearing rescheduled for 6/30/98 at 9:00 Court Reporter: A Mason (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/11/1998)
33 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to dismiss Missouri Human Rights Claim (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/14/1998)
34 Suggestions by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva in opposition to motion to consolidate cases 97-1607-CV-W-SOW & 97-1221-CV-W-1 [23-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/14/1998)
35 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright denying dft's motion for reconsideration of the Court's Order denying dft's Motion to Dismiss and Granting Plt's Motion to Amend Complaint [30-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/15/1998)

5 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

05/15/1998 05/15/1998 05/15/1998 05/18/1998 05/21/1998 05/21/1998 06/05/1998 06/08/1998 06/08/1998 06/10/1998
06/12/1998 06/12/1998 06/12/1998 06/12/1998
06/15/1998

36 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting EEOC's motion to intervene as Party Plt [10-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
37 COMPLAINT of Plaintiff-Intervenor EEOC; Jury trial demand 0 Summons(es) issued) (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
38 ANSWER by defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett to plaintiffs' 1st Amended Class Action Complaint (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/19/1998)
39 Reply suggestions by defendant to motion to consolidate cases 97-1607-CV-W-SOW & 97-1221-CV-W-1 [23-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/19/1998)
40 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting plt's motion to dismiss Missouri Human Rights Claim contained in Count II of the First Amended Class Action Complaint [33-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/21/1998)
41 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright denying dft's motion to consolidate cases 97-1607-CV-W-SOW & 97-1221-CV-W-1 [23-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 05/21/1998)
43 MOTION by defendant Woodbine Healthcare for leave to file answer to Complaint of plt-intervenor Equal Employment Opportunity Commission out of time (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/09/1998)
42 MINUTE ENTRY/TELECONFERENCE Judge Scott O. Wright presiding Court Reporter: A Mason; Discovery dispute discussed re possible improper contact with witnesses in this case (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/09/1998)
44 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva expedite responses to plts' first interrogatories to dft (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/09/1998)
45 CERTIFICATE of transmission of deposition of Shawna Helt taken on 6/8/9 on behalf of defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett Costs: $86.40 pending pymt by dfts; $19.60 pending pymt by plf (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 06/10/1998)
46 CERTIFICATE by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva of service of plt's 1st interrogatories (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/12/1998)
47 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright that the dfts are prohibited from making any ex parte contacts w/any current or former Philippine employees (cc: all counsel) (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 06/12/1998)
48 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting plf's motion expedite responses to plts' first interrogatories to dft [44-1]; dfts' responses are due on or before 6/20/98 (cc: all counsel) (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 06/12/1998)
49 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting dft's motion for leave to file answer to Complaint of plt-intervenor Equal Employment Opportunity Commission out of time [43-1] 10 days from the date of this Order (cc: all counsel) (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 06/12/1998)
50 ANSWER by defendant Woodbine Healthcare (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/16/1998)

6 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

06/19/1998 06/22/1998 06/23/1998 06/23/1998 06/25/1998 06/26/1998 06/26/1998 06/26/1998 06/30/1998 06/30/1998 07/07/1998
07/20/1998

52 CERTIFICATE of transmission of deposition of Aileen Villanueva taken on 6/10/98 on behalf of defendants Costs: $558.90/plt and $116.50/dft (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/22/1998)
51 CERTIFICATE by defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett of service of Response to plt's 1st interrogatories to dfts Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/22/1998)
53 CERTIFICATE by defendant of service of Suppl to dft's Response to plt's 1st Interrogatories to dft Woodbine Healthcare Limited partnership (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/24/1998)
54 Suggestions by defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett in opposition to motion to Certify Class Action [14-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/24/1998)
55 CERTIFICATE by defendant of service of 2nd Supplement to dft's Response to plts' 1st Interrogatories to dft Woodbine (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/25/1998)
56 CERTIFICATE by defendant of service of 3rd Supplement to dft's Response to plt's 1st Interrogatories to Dft Woodbine Healthcare Limited Partnership (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/26/1998)
57 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE on behalf of defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett by W. James Foland (Susan Larson) (Entered: 06/29/1998)
58 Reply suggestions by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to dft's suggs in opp to plfs' motion to Certify Class Action [14-1] (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 06/29/1998)
59 PRELIMINARY EXHIBIT INDEX OF defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett (Court Employee) (Entered: 07/01/1998)
60 EXHIBIT INDEX OF plaintiff Aileen Villanueva (Court Employee) (Entered: 07/01/1998)
61 MINUTE ENTRY/Hearing on Motion for Class Certification Judge Scott O. Wright presiding Court Reporter: A Mason; Parties Present; Court takes up the matter of possible class certification; The plt presents oral argument for class certification; dft presents oral argument that case should not be a class certified case; Noon Recess at 11:30am until 1:30pm; 1:50pm court again in session; dft requests that the witness exclusion rule be invoked; court denies; plt presents evidence; Cross exam at 2:35pm Court inquires of both parties regarding discvoery documents; court orders the dft to turn over all documents regarding Nursew quarters Inc. and the cmployment of these nurses; Plt ordered to continue the discovery regarding the contracts in the Philippines; Dft given thirty days to produce discovery documents to plt; court takes the matter under advisement until discovery is completed regarding the class certification; The plt is to pursue discovery regarding the class action; Recess at 3:40pm; Court will reschedule the continuance of this hearing (Court Employee) (Entered: 07/07/1998)
62 TRANSCRIPT of Hearing on Class Certification held on 6/30/98 before Judge Scott O. Wright (Court Employee) (Entered: 07/20/1998)

7 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

09/03/1998 09/08/1998 09/15/1998
10/06/1998 10/19/1998
10/22/1998
10/28/1998 10/28/1998 10/28/1998 10/28/1998 10/28/1998 11/02/1998 11/10/1998

63 CERTIFICATE of transmission of deposition of James W. Austin taken on 7/23/98 on behalf of plaintiff Costs: $1,097.20 (Court Employee) (Entered: 09/03/1998)
64 CERTIFICATE by plaintiff of service of 2nd interrs, and req f/admissions to dft Woodbine Healthcare Limited (Court Employee) (Entered: 09/08/1998)
65 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright denying plfs' motion to Certify Class Action [14-1]; it is further ordered that plfs must refile a motion to certify, addressing Rule 23(b)(3), by 10/23/98; it is further ordered that dft has until 11/6/98 to respond, and any reply must be filed by 11/13/98 (cc: all counsel) (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 09/16/1998)
66 CERTIFICATE by defendant Woodbine Healthcare of service of Response to plt's 2nd Interrogatories and response to plt's request for admission (Sealed Case User) (Entered: 10/07/1998)
67 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett, intervenor EEOC to extend time to refile motion to certify and to revise briefing deadlines (Court Employee) (Entered: 10/20/1998)
68 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting plt's motion to extend time to refile motion to certify and to revise briefing deadlines; The Motion shall be file on or before 10/28/98 and response by 9/11/98; reply by 11/18/98 [67-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 10/22/1998)
69 CERTIFICATE of transmission of deposition of Norma C. Cossins taken on 9/17/98 on behalf of plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, intervenor EEOC Costs: $644.20/plt and $193.70/dft (Court Employee) (Entered: 10/28/1998)
70 CERTIFICATE of transmission of deposition of R. Denny Barnett, Volume I and II on behalf of plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, intervenor EEOC Costs: $1122.20/plt & $322.10/dft (Court Employee) (Entered: 10/28/1998)
71 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to certify class Action Pursuant to the Court's Order dated 9/15/98 (Court Employee) (Entered: 10/29/1998)
72 Suggestions by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva in support of motion to certify class Action Pursuant to the Court's Order dated 9/15/98 [71-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 10/29/1998)
102 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to certify class action pusuant to the Court's order dated 9/15/98 (Cassaundra Honeycutt) (Entered: 02/06/2002)
73 MOTION by defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross to extend time to respond to Motion to Certify (Court Employee) Modified on 11/04/1998 (Entered: 11/03/1998)
74 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting dft's motion to extend time to respond to Motion to Certify until and including 11/23/98; Plts shall have until and including 12/3/98 within which to file a reply to dfts' response [73-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 11/10/1998)

8 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

11/18/1998 11/19/1998 11/20/1998
12/21/1998
12/31/1998 01/05/1999 01/29/1999
02/11/1999 02/12/1999 02/18/1999 02/23/1999 02/26/1999 03/05/1999

75 MOTION by defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett to extend time to respond to plts' motion to certify Class Action (Court Employee) (Entered: 11/19/1998)
77 MINUTE ENTRY Judge Scott O. Wright presiding Court Reporter: A. Mason; Dft's Motion for extension of time discussed; The Court is informed of mediation for this case set for 12/7 and 12/8, 1998 (Court Employee) (Entered: 11/20/1998)
76 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting dft's motion to extend time to respond to plts' motion to certify Class Action to and including 12/14/98, plt's have to 12/21/98 to file a reply [75-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 11/20/1998)
78 Suggestions by defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett in opposition to motion to certify class Action Pursuant to the Court's Order dated 9/15/98 [71-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 12/22/1998)
79 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva to extend time to file reply brief (Court Employee) (Entered: 01/04/1999)
80 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting motion to extend time to file reply brief to 1/11/99 [79-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 01/05/1999)
81 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright denying motion to certify class Action Pursuant to the Court's Order dated 9/15/98; It is further ordered that the parties submit the proposed consent Decree to this court no later that 15 days from the date of this Order [71-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 01/29/1999)
82 MOTION by defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett, intervenor EEOC to extend time , for leave to file (Court Employee) (Entered: 02/12/1999)
83 Stipulation of class certification, definition, class representative and class counsel of plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 02/16/1999)
84 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting EEOC and dft's motion to extend time [82-1], granting motion for leave to file [82-2] their proposed consent decree up to 2/26/99 (cc: all counsel) (Susan Larson) (Entered: 02/18/1999)
85 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, defendant Woodbine Healthcare for protective order (Court Employee) (Entered: 02/24/1999)
86 PROTECTIVE ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright : granting motion for protective order; See order for specific details [85-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 02/26/1999)
87 MINUTE ENTRY:Teleconference as to plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett, intervenor EEOC Judge Scott O. Wright presiding; Parties have completed their settlement agreement; class action schedule established; Court Reporter: A. Mason (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 03/10/1999)

9 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

03/08/1999 03/10/1999 04/14/1999 04/23/1999 06/03/1999 06/04/1999
06/04/1999
06/04/1999 06/08/1999 07/02/1999 08/12/1999 08/31/1999 11/06/2000 12/14/2000

88 Amended Stipulation of Class Certification, Definition, Class Representative and Class Counsel plaintiff Aileen Villanueva (Court Employee) (Entered: 03/10/1999)
89 (AMENDED CONSENT DECREE) ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting joint stipulation [88-1] (cc: all counsel) (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 03/10/1999)
90 MINUTE ENTRY Judge Scott O. Wright presiding Court Reporter: A. Mason; Notice to class will be amended; Fairness hearing is still set for 6/4/99 (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/18/1999)
91 RESPONSE by D. Collado to Proposed Consent Decree [89-1] (Court Employee) (Entered: 04/27/1999)
92 MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva for attorney fees and expenses (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/04/1999)
93 MINUTE ENTRY/Approval Hearing/Class Action Judge Scott O. Wright presiding Court Reporter: S. Brogan; Fairness hearing re: completion of settlement of this Class Action held; plt's motion (92) is granted; Final order of approval will be revised & presented to the Court for signature (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/04/1999)
94 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting motion for attorney fees and expenses; $400,000.00 is approved as attorney fees to Class Counsel, Anderson & Associates, LLC and that reimbursement of $30,000 for Class Counsel's costs and expenses is also approved; These funds shall be delivered to Anderson & Associates, LLC pursuant to the terms of the Amended Consent Decree [92-1] (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/04/1999)
96 EXHIBIT INDEX OF defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett (rec'd 6/17/99) (Susan Larson) (Entered: 06/17/1999)
95 ORDER OF FINAL APPROVAL OF AMENDED CONSENT DECREE by Judge Scott O. Wright; See Order for specific details terminating case (cc: all counsel) (Court Employee) (Entered: 06/09/1999)
97 JOINT MOTION by plaintiff Aileen Villanueva, defendant Woodbine Healthcare, defendant Robert Norcross, defendant Denny Barnett to extend time for settlement checks to be issued (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 07/02/1999)
98 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting joint motion to extend time for settlement checks to be issued [97-1] up to & including 7/12/99 (cc: all counsel) (Georgia Kee) (Entered: 08/12/1999)
99 NOTICE by defendant Woodbine Healthcare of change of address (Steve Navarro) (Entered: 09/01/1999)
100 MOTION by intervenor EEOC for order to approve charitable organization as beneficiary of remaining undistributed settlement fund monies (Steve Navarro) (Entered: 11/06/2000)
101 ORDER by Judge Scott O. Wright granting motion for order to approve charitable organization as beneficiary of remaining undistributed settlement fund

10 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

CM/ECF Western District of Missouri - Docket Report

https://ecf.mowd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?305312065583354-L_...

monies [100-1]; that this Court approves Filipinos for Affirmative Action, a Secion 501(c)(3) charitable orgaization, located at 310 Eighth Street, Suite 308, Oakland, Caliornia 94607 as beneficiary of undistributed settlement fund monies under the terms of the Consent Decree entered in this case; that Third Party Administrator Baird, Kurtz and Dobson shall distribute any remaining monies to Filipinos for Affirmative Action, at the address listed above, within ten (10) days of this Order. (cc: all counsel) (Steve Navarro) (Entered: 12/14/2000)

PACER Login:
Description:
Billable Pages:

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
06/05/2007 12:15:48

hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

4:97-cv-01607-SOW

7

Cost:

0.56

11 of 11

6/5/2007 12:15 PM

 
 EEOC ANNOUNCES $2.1 MILLION SETTLEMENT OF WAGE DI...

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/3-2-99.html

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Tuesday, March 2, 1999

CONTACT: Lynn Y. Bruner District Director (913) 551-5692
Robert G. Johnson Regional Attorney (913) 551-6986
Donna L. Harper Senior Trial Attorney (913) 551-5800

EEOC ANNOUNCES $2.1 MILLION SETTLEMENT OF WAGE
DISCRIMINATION SUIT FOR CLASS OF FILIPINO NURSES

KANSAS CITY, MO -- The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today announced a $2.1 million settlement of a class employment discrimination lawsuit against Woodbine Healthcare Center (Woodbine), a nursing home in Gladstone, Mo. The suit alleged that Woodbine discriminated against 65 Filipino registered nurses in wages, assignments, and other terms and conditions of employment due to their national origin.
"This is the second significant settlement in a week that EEOC has handled dealing with discrimination against foreign-born workers," said EEOC Chairwoman Ida L. Castro. "The first, a $1.8 million settlement, brought relief to a class of agricultural workers in California and Arizona. Today's settlement stems from an instance of employees who, because of their country of origin, have been denied the dignity of working in a discrimination-free workplace that compensates them fairly. Foreign-born employees ought not be deprived of an equal opportunity to reach the American Dream."
In the proposed Consent Decree filed today with U.S. District Judge Scott O. Wright in Kansas City, Mo., Woodbine agreed to pay $2.1 million to the class of 65 Filipino nurses and their attorneys, Anderson & Associates. Of that amount, the class will share in compensatory damages of approximately $1.2 million and backpay and interest of approximately $470,000. Their attorneys will receive approximately $400,000 in fees and $30,000 in expenses. The backpay was based on the average rate of pay that U.S. nurses earned while working for Woodbine.
In 1993-1995, Woodbine petitioned the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to allow it to employ foreign registered nurses in its nursing home, claiming a shortage of registered nurses in the Kansas City area. Woodbine promised to employ the Filipinos as registered nurses and pay them the same wages it paid U.S. registered nurses.
However, contrary to its pledge, Woodbine paid the Filipino nurses about $6.00 an hour less than their U.S. counterparts. Moreover, rather than employing the Filipinos as registered nurses, they were assigned as nurses aides and technicians. And even those Filipino nurses who were ultimately assigned to registered nurse jobs received lower pay than the U.S. nurses at Woodbine.
In 1996, two of the Filipino nurses filed discrimination charges with EEOC. An agency investigation found reasonable cause that Woodbine violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by failing to assign and compensate the Filipino nurses as registered nurses, and harassing and intimidating them because of their national origin.
Following EEOC's "cause" finding, Woodbine rejected efforts to conciliate the matter and one of the Filipino nurses, Aileen Villanueva, filed a private discrimination lawsuit. The EEOC intervened in the suit, alleging a pattern and practice of discrimination against all of the Filipino nurses at Woodbine, after the Commission's General Counsel certified that the case was of general public importance. "EEOC's intervention was instrumental in achieving a swift class settlement in this case," said Chairwoman Castro.
EEOC General Counsel C. Gregory Stewart remarked: "This case establishes that employers cannot take advantage of foreign-born employees by paying them less and assigning them to menial jobs without regard to their skills. The Commission's National Enforcement Plan has targeted cases such as this involving broad-based employment discrimination in pay and assignments."
In addition to the EEOC's suit, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) earlier investigated Woodbine for prevailing-wage discrimination violations concerning the 65 Filipino nurses. As a result of the DOL investigation, Woodbine agreed in 1998 to pay $700,000 in back pay and penalties, with the payments spread over a three-year period.
Among other provisions of today's settlement, Woodbine will immediately provide the full payment under its previous agreement with DOL -- bringing the total recovery from the combined proceedings to $2.8 million. "I am extremely pleased that the Commission was able to work closely with the Department of Labor to obtain full relief for these victims of such egregious discrimination," Ms. Castro said.
In addition to the monetary awards, Woodbine also agreed to send each Filipino nurse a letter of apology. The letter states: "We wish to personally express our deep regret for any offensive conduct by Woodbine's managers, supervisors and administrators... including being mis-assigned into a lower-paying and less responsible position than that of a Registered Nurse, and being treated differently from the U.S. employees in other ways."
Lynn Y. Bruner, Director of EEOC's St. Louis District Office, said: "This settlement should send a clear message to the employer community that EEOC will vigorously enforce the right of workers to be fairly compensated for their work, despite their national

1 of 2

6/5/2007 12:22 PM

EEOC ANNOUNCES $2.1 MILLION SETTLEMENT OF WAGE DI...

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/3-2-99.html

origin, race, or gender."
Woodbine was recently acquired by new owners who were not named in the complaints and did not participate in the settlement.
EEOC enforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, and national origin; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, which prohibits discrimination against individuals 40 years of age or older; sections of the Civil Rights Act of 1991; the Equal Pay Act; Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in the private sector and state and local governments; and the Rehabilitation Act's prohibitions against disability discrimination in the federal government.
This page was last modified on March 3, 1999.

Return to Home Page

2 of 2

6/5/2007 12:22 PM