Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ
•

Document 1

Filed 07/31/1997
•

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA

Civil Aotion No. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
TACO BELL, INC., d/b/a TACO BELL EXPRESS and DOUBLE-D, INC.,
Defendants.

Page 1 of 7
FILED
JUL 3 1 1997
~~

COMPLAINT AND JURY TRIAL DEMAND

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an aotion under Title VII of the civil Rights Aot of 1964, as amended, to oorrect unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and to make whole Karla Willuweit ("Willuweit") and Brenda Handiguard, formerly Brenda Miles ("Miles"), both former employees. Thls acLion alleges that Willuweit and Miles were subjected to a sexually hostile work environment while employed at Taoo Bell, Inc., d/b/a Taoo Bell Express, and that Taco Bell, Inc. and Double-D, Inc. failed to take appropriate corrective actions to eliminate the harassment.
JUHISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This aotion is authori2~d and in~titut~d purguant to 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e
II

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ
•

Document 1

Filed 07/31/1997
•

Page 2 of 7

£:t ~ ("Title VII"), and section 102 of the civil Rights Act of
1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981(A). 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were
committed within the jurisdiction of the United states District Court for the District of South Dakota.
PARTIES
3. Plaintiff, Equal Employment opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is an agency of the united states of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII and is expressly authorized to bring this action by 706(f) (1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. S 2000e-5(f) (1).
4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Taco Bell, Inc., doing business as Taco Bell Express, has continuously been a California corporation doinq business in the state of south Dakota and the city of sioux Falls and has continuously had at least fifteen employees.
5. At all relevant times, Defendant, Taco Bell, Inc., has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of section 701 (b) I (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-(b), (g) and (h).
6. At all relevant times, Defendant, Double-D, Inc., has continuously been a South Dakota Corporation doing business in the state of South Dakota and the city of sioux Falls and has continuously had at least fifteen employees.
7. At all relevant times, Defendant, Double-D, Inc., has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting

2

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ
•

Document 1

Filed 07/31/1997
•

Page 3 of 7

oommeroe within the meaning of section 701(0), (9) and (h) of Title
VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-(b), (g) and (h). STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
9. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Willuweit and Miles filed charges with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant Employers. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
10. Since at least November, 1993, Defendant Employers have individually and jointly engaged in unlawful employment practices at its sioux Falls facility, in violation of sections 703(a) (1) and 704 (a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2 (a) (1) and 3 (a). Such unlawful employment practices have included the subjecting of Willuweit and Miles to a sexually hostile work environment.
11. In or about January of 1993, Defendant Taco Bell, Inc. hired Defendant Double-D, Inc. to oversee or manage the Taco Bell Express Units. The relationship between the Defendants was informal and there is no written contract between the Defendants.
At all rolovant times Taco Bell, Inc. owned the Ta.co Expr...ss unit...
12. Willuweit was hired by Taco Bell Express in November of 1993. Throughout her employment Willuweit was sexually harassed by her Manager, Scott Larson. Specifically, Larson used offensive language and engaged in unwelcome touching. Further, on a daily basis Larson discussed his sex life with Willuweit. This sexual harassment continued until approximately March 1994 when Willuweit transferred to another store. On July 14, 1994, willuweit filed a

3

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ
•

Document 1

Filed 07/31/1997
•

Page 4 of 7

charge of discrimination with the Sioux Falls Human Rights commission.
13. Miles was hired by Taco Bell Express on about November 1993. Larson sexually harassed Miles on virtually a daily basis. Specifically, Larson would unsnap her bra and pull it from under' her shirt. Further, Lar'son made constant sexual innuendos and suggestions. On May 25, 1994, Miles filed her charge of discrimination with the Sioux Falls Human Relations Commission.
14. The effect of the practices complained of above has been to deprive Willuweit and Miles of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex.
15. The unlawful employment practices complained of in
paragraphs 10-13 were intentional.
16. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 10-13 were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Wi1luweit and Miles.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employers, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, £rom engaging in any employment practice which discriminates on the basis of sex.

4

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ
•

Document 1

Filed 07/31/1997
•

Page 5 of 7

B. Order Defendant Employers to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for women, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.
C. Order Defendant Employers to make whole Willuweit and MIles, by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment interest, in 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 reinstatement or front pay where appropriate for Willuweit and Miles.
D. Order Defendant Employers to make whole Willuweit and Miles, by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 10-13 above, including but not limited to job search expenses and any medical expenses not covered by the Employer's employee benefit plan, in amounts to be determined at trial.
E. Order Defendant Employers to make whole Willuweit and Miles by providing oompensation for past and future nonpeouniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 10-13 above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.
F. OL'der Defendant. Employers to pay WIlluwelt and MIles punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described in paragraphs 10-13 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

5

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ
•

Document 1

Filed 07/31/1997
•

Page 6 of 7

G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary

and proper.

H. Award the commission its costs in this action.

JURY TRIAL PEMANP

The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact

~ Of~' raised by its Complaint.
Dated this ol:t::..day

1997.

Respectfully submitted,

C. GREGORY STEWART General Counsel
J. RAY TERRY
Deputy General Counsel
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507
~l:~ Regiona Attar ey

NELSON G. LSTON Trial Attorney
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Denver District Office 303 East 17th Avenue, Suite 510 Denver, CO 80203 Telephone: (303) 866-1378

6

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ
•

Document 1

Filed 07/31/1997
•

Page 7 of 7

PLBA8S NOTSI
It is sUfficient for purposes of service on the EEOC that pleadings, notices and any other court document be served on the Trial Attorney. Therefore, duplicate service is not required on the General Counselor the Deputy General
Counsel located in Washington, D.C.

7

 
 Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ Document 144 Filed 09/08/1998 Page 1 of 1
FILED
SEP - 81998
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Plaintiff,
vs. TACO BELL, INC.
Defendant.

CIV97-4160 JUDGMENT ON JURY VERDICT

This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its verdict. Therefore, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
on behalf of Brenda Handegard and Karla Zick, recover no amount of money from defendant Taco
Bell, Inc., and th~t plaintiff's complaint be and the same hereby is dismissed with prejudice; the jury having found the verdict for the defendant.

Dated this,! Cday of September, 199R
ATTEST: JOSEPH HAAS, C~k
By: //!:t!.f/1?j/{/,? ,:1
Deputy Clerk (SEAL)

.S. District Judge
I

 
 Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ Document 154 Filed 12/17/1998 Page 1 of 5

PILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT couR-rDEC 1 7 1998

DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

*******+++++w+**********************************************

*

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY *

COMMISSION,

"-

CIV 97-4160

*

Plaintiff,

*

"k

-vs-

*

ORDER ON POST TRIAL

*

TACO BELL CORP. , d/b/a

"

TACO BELL EXPRESS,

*

MOTIONS

*

Defendant.

*

*

************************************************************

All post-trial motions are now ready for decision, and it

appears to the Court that oral argument thereon is

unnecessary.

This case was brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC) against Taco Bell Corp. d/b/a Taco Bell

Express and Double-D, Inc. alleging that Ms. Zick and Ms.

Handegard were subjected to a sexually hostile work environment while employed at a Taco Bell Express located in the W<;il-M<;irt stoIC'" in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Double D settled with the plaintiff and was dismissed as a party to this action. See Doc. 130. The claims against Taco Bell were tried to a jury, which found that MS. ;Gick and Ms. HandegclJ,d

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ Document 154 Filed 12/17/1998 Page 2 of 5

were employed by Taco Bell and that they were subjected to a hostile work environment. The jury found that Taco Bell proved all of the elements of the affirmative defense

established by Faragher v. City of Boca Raton,

U.S.

118 S.Ct. 2275 (1998), and returned verdicts for the defendant

against the plaintiff. Defendant Taco B"ll CO-L-p.' is Motion to Amend, Doc. 148,

seeks to amend its Answer to assert the affirmative defense established by Faragher. This defense was tried to the jury by both sides, and the jury was instructed thereon in Instruction 17 with the consent of the parties. This proposed

amendment was actually tried without objection and the motion to amend will be granted.

At trial, the Court quashed a subpoena duces tecum served by Taco Bell in an attempt to get a copy of the Double-D settlement. Defendant now seeks to vacate that order. If the jury had returned a verdict against Taco Bell, I conclude that

Taco Bell would be entitled to a copy of the Double-D settlement, but since Taco Bell won, it is not now entitled to a copy of the settlement. Defendant Taco Bell Corp.'s Motion to vacate Order Quashing Subpoena Duces Tecum, Doc. 153, will be denied.

2

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ Document 154 Filed 12/17/1998 Page 3 of 5
Plaintiff has made a Combined Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict or, Alternatively, a New Trial, DoC. 146. The Motion for Judgement Notwithstanding the Verdict is made pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50 (a), which now refers to such motions as motions for judgment as a matter of law. The Court will utilize the CUL-L-ent. te.r:minology in discussing this motion.
Plaintiff has a heavy burden to prove it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law:
In ruling on a motion tor [judgment as a matter ot law), the district court must (1) consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party, (2) assume that all conflicts in the evidence were resolved in favor of the prevailing party, (3) assume as proved all facts that the prevailing party's evidence tended to prove, and (4) give the prevailing party the benefit of all favorable inferences that may reasonably be drawn from the facts proved. That done, the court must then deny the motion if reasonable persons could differ as to the conclusions to be drawn from the evidence. Haynes V See_Line Trucking Co , BO F.3d 1235, 123B (8th cir. 1996) (citations omitted) . Plaintiff bases its motion for judgment as a matter of law in part on the claim that the Faragher affirmative defense should not have been submitted because defendant did not include it in its Answer. Defendant was permitted to amend
3

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ Document 154 Filed 12/17/1998 Page 4 of 5
its summary judgment motion to allege the Faragher affirmative defense therein, and the Faragher defense was a part of this case thereafter. Plaintiff submitted a proposed jury instruction thereon and did not object to the Court's Instruction 17 submitting this defense to the jury.
Plaintiff also asserts there is insufficient evidence to
establish the two prongs of the affirmative defense.
Considering the standard for evaluating a motion for judgment as a matter of law as set forth above, I conclude that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's decisioIl thereon. See ~ The Taco Bell Express was operated by the Hudson family as owners of Double-D. Their evidence presented at trial was sufficient to establish both prongs of the affirmative defense. The Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict (motion for judgment as a matter of law), Doc. 146, will be denied.
On plaintiff's Morion for" New Trial, I believe there is ample evidence in the record to support the verdict. In ruling on a motion for new trial pursuant to Rule 59(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure " ... the ultimate test [is] whether there ha[s] been a miscarriage of justice." White v. Pence, 961 F.2d 776, 780 (8th Cir. 1992). The evidence in
4

Case 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ Document 154 Filed 12/17/1998 Page 5 of 5

this case was in dispute on all issues, and the jury decided

some of those issues in favor of the plaintiff and some in

favor of the defendant. I do not believe the jury erred in

any of its decisions or that there has been a miscarriage of

justice in this case. The motion for a new trial will be

denied.

Now, therefore,

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) That Defendant Taco Bell Corp.'s Motion to Amend,

Doc. 148, is granted.

(2) That Defendant Taco Bell Corp.' s Motion to vacate

Order Quashing Subpoena Duces Tecum, Doc. 153, is denied.

(3) That Plaintiff's Combined Motion for Judgment

Notwithstanding the Verdict or, Alternatively, a New Trial,

Doc. 146, is denied in all respects.
Dated this 17 /1_ day of December, 1998.

A'l"I'EST:

flY 'l')4·f) COURT:
i., [:1: A ..~C?-~_

Skni1r u.s. Distri

; I

/
./

!

\ . .. /

Judge

,

r

'-'.,

5

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION
Civil Action No. 97-4160
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
TACO BELL CORP., d/b/a TACO BELL EXPREss and DOUBLE-D, INC.,
Defendants.

FILEb
SEP 221997

AMBMDBD COMPLAINT .urn JURY TRIAL DEMAND

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, to correct unlawful employment practices on the bo.sis of sex and to make whole Karla Wi11uweit ("Willuwait") <lnd Brenda Handiguard, formerly Brenda Miles ("Miles"), both forIter employees. This action alleges that Willuweit and Miles were subjected to a sexually hostile work environment while employed at Taco Bell Corp., d/b/a Taco Bell Express, and that Taco Bell Corp. and Double-D, Inc. failed to take appropriate corrective actions to eliminate the harassment.
JURISpICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to 706(!) (1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e

gt ~ ("Title VII"), and section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981(A).
2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawt'ul YJlere committed within the jurisdiction of the united states District Court for the District of south Dakota.
PlI.R'T'TF.S
3. Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity commission (the "Commission"), is an agency of the united states of America chal:'ged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII and is expressly authorized to bring this action by 706(f) (1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 20009-5(£) (1)_
4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Taco Bell corp., dding business as Taco Bell Express, has continuously been a Califo~nia corporation doing business in the state of south Dakota and the city of Sioux Falls and has continuously had at least fifteen employees.
5. At all relevant times, Defendant, Taco Bell Corp., has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of section 701 (b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-(b), (g) and (h).
6. At all relevant times, Defendant, Double-D, Inc., has continuously been a south Dakota Corporation doing business in the state of South Dakota and the city of Sioux Falls and .has continuously had at least fifteen employees.
7. At all relevant times, Defendant, Double-D, Inc., has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry arrect:ing
2

commerce within the meaning of section 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-(b), (g) and (h).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 9. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Willuweit and Miles filed charges with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant F.mployers. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 10. Since at least November, 1993, Defendant Employers have individually and jointly engaged in unlawful employment practices at its sioux Falls facility, in violation of sections 703(a) (1) and 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a) (1) and 3(a). SlUch unlawful employment practices have included the subjecting of Willuweit and Miles to a sexually hostile work environment. 11. In or about January of 1993, Defendant Taco Bell C~p. hired Defendant Double-D, Ino. to oversee or manage the Taoo Bell Express units. The relationship between the Defendants was informal and there is no written contract between the Defendants. At all relevant times Taco Bell Corp. owned the Taco Express units. 12. Willuweit was hired by Taco Bell Express in November of 1993. Throughout her employment Willuweit was sexually harassed by her Manager, Scott Larson. Specifically, Larson used offensive language and engaged in unwelcome touching. Further, on a daily basis Larson discussed his sex life with Willuweit. This sexUal harassment continued until approximately March 1994 when Willuweit transrerrea to anotner store. on JUly 14, 1994, willuweit riled a
3

charge of discrimination with the sioux Falls Human Ri~hts Commission.
13. Miles was hired by Taco Bell Express on a~out November 1993. Larson sexually harassed Miles on virtually a daily basis. Specifically, Larson would unsnap her bra and pull it from under her Qhirt. Further, Larson made constant sexual innuendos and suggestions. On May 25, 1994, Miles filed her charge of discrimination with the sioux Falls Human Relations Commissiom.
14. The effect of the practices complained of above has ~een to deprive Willuweit and Miles of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees beoausa of their sex.
15. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 10-13 were intentional.
16. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs ~O-~3 were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Willuweit and Miles.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employers, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from enqaqinq in any employment practice which discriminates on the basis of sex.
4

B. Order Oef.mdant F.mployers to institute and carry out

policies, practices and programs which provide equal employment

opportunities for women, and which eradicate the effects of its

I

past and present unlawful employment practices.

C. Order Defendant Employers to make whole Willuweit· and

Mil$s, by providing appropriate backpay with prejudgment inter.st,

in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief

necessary to eradicate the effects of its unlawful emploYJjent

practices, including but not limited to, rightful-place

reinstatement or front pay where appropriate for Willuweitand

Miles.

D. Order Defendant Employers to make whole Willuweit and

Miles, by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary

losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described

in paragraphs 10-13 above, including but not limited to job search

expenses and any medical expenses not covered by the Employer's

employee benefit plan, in amounts to be determined at trial.

E. Order Defendant Employers to make whole Willuweit and

Miles by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary

losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in

paragraphs 10-13 above, including emotional pain, suffering,

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

amounts to be determined at trial.

F. Order Defendant Employers to pay Willuweit and Milllls

punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct described

in paragraphs 10-13 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

5

G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary

and proper.

H. Award the Commission its costs in this action.

I

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact

'l"<,dSAd by its: Complaint..

Dated this 17th day of September, 1997.

Respectfully submitted,

C. GREGORY STEWART General Counsel
j. RAY TERRY
Deputy General Counsel
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507

NELSON G. A TON Trial Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION Denver District Office 303 East 17th Avenue, suite 510 Denver, CO 80203 Telephone: (303) 866-1378
6

PLEASE NOTB: It is suffioient for purposes of servioe on the EEOC that pleadings, notices and any other court document be served on the Trial Attorney.
Therefore, duplicate servioe
is not required on the General Counselor the Deputy General Counsel located in Washington, D.C.
7

 
 FILED

UNITED STATE.S DI.STRICT COURT

JUL -7 1998

DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION

~~ C~ERK

, ****************************************************************

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY *

ClV 97-4160

COMMISSION,

*

*

Plaintiff,

*

*

-vs-

*

ORDER

*

TACO BELL CORP. , d/b/a

*

TACO BELL EXPRESS, and

*

DOUBLE-D, INC. ,

*

*

Defendants.

*

*

*****************************************************************

On Monday, July 6, 1998, the Court held a motion hearing and

pretrial conference in this case. Attorneys for the parties argued

the pending motions for summary judgment. As stated orally on the

record at the conclusion of argument, taking all facts in the light

most favorable to plaintiff, the Court applied the factors set out

in

560 F.2d 389, 392 (8th cir.

1977), and determined that defendants Taco Bell Corporation, d/b/a

Taco Bell Express, and Double D, Inc., were joint employers of the

charging parties, Karla Zick and Brenda Handegard, in this Title

VII action hrnllght- on t-hp; r hph"l f hy t-hp P.r!""l Rmploympnt-

Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Further, taking the facts in the

light most favorable to the plai.ntiff, and applying the recent

Uni ted States Supreme Court cases of Faragher v. Ci ty of Boca

Raton,

S.Ct.

1998 WL 336322 (June 26, 1998), and

Burlington Indus., Inc. v. Ellerth, --- S.Ct. ---, 1998 WL 336326

(June 26, 1998), the Court determined that there are genuine issues

ot material tact for trial on the affirmative defense that may be

asserted by the defendants in light of

and

Accordingly,

I
I:

IT IS ORDERED:
(1) that the EEOC's "Motion To Strike Defendant Taco Bell Corp.'s Motion For Summary Judgment And Defendant
Double-D, Inc. 18 Motion Fol.- Summa~-y JudgmenL rr 10 uelll~u.
(Doc. 58.)

(?) t-h"t- riprpnri"nr 1'"(',, 1',1"11 Corporation'g IIMotion For
Summary Judgment" is denied. (Doc. 45.)

(3) that defendant Double D, Inc.'s "Motion For Summary Judgment" is denied. (Doc. 49.)

(4) that the Court's Amended Rule 16 Scheduling Order

riled un MdY 29, 1998, Lemdins in effect.

Dated this

f\~ day of July, 1998.

ATTEST:

JOSEPH HAAS, C~~

BY: #7.dAdru . ' !t{!

2 (SEAL)

D""E~P"'U""T:::;Y

BY THE COURT:
~~~f~l" ..
United States District Judge

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH DAKOTA SOUTHERN DIVISION
Civil Action No. 97-4160
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

FILED
AUG 1 !j 1998

Plaintiff, v.
TACO BELL CORP., d/b/a TACO BELL EXPRESS and DOUBLE-D, INC.,
Defendant•.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO DE.FENDANT DOUBLE-D, INC.

THIS MATTER coming before the Court on the Stipulated Motion for Dismissal With Prejudice as to Defendant Double-D, Inc., and the Court being fully advised in the premises,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Amended Complaint and the action be dismiss"d, with prejudice, as to Defendant Double-D, Inc., each party to pay its own attorney's fees and costs.
DATED this It!'!. day of August, 1998.

BY THE COURT;

I

United State District Judge

Ie

 
 South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

U.S. District Court District of South Dakota (Southern Division) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ

CLOSED

EEOC v. Taco Bell, Inc., et al Assigned to: U.S. District Judge John B. Jones Demand: $0 Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 07/31/1997 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Mia E. Bitterman Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Denver District Office 303 E. 17th Ave. Suite 510 Denver, CO 80203 (303)866-1378 Fax: 866-1375 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Nelson G. Alston Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Denver District Office 303 E. 17th Ave. Suite 510 Denver, CO 80203 (303)866-1378 Fax: 866-1375 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
Taco Bell, Inc. doing business as Taco Bell Express

represented by Christopher J. Harristhal Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Ave. S. Bloomington, MN 55431-1194 (952)835-3800 Fax: 896-3333 LEAD ATTORNEY

1 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

Defendant Double-D Inc. TERMINATED: 08/18/1998
Interested Party Sioux Falls, City of

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert L. Mabee 300 N. Dakota Ave. Suite 612 Sioux Falls, SD 57104 336-7770 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Scott D. Kading Moore, Rasmussen, Kading & Kunstle PO Box 1477 Sioux Falls, SD 57101 336-1730 Fax: 336-6599 TERMINATED: 08/18/1998 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by R. Shawn Tornow City Attorney's Office Sioux Falls 224 W. 9th St. Sioux Falls, SD 57104-6407 367-8880 Fax: 367-7330 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 07/31/1997 07/31/1997 09/18/1997 09/18/1997 09/18/1997

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT: no summons(es) issued (plaintiffs advise of proceeding by waiver of summons); jury demand (SKM) (Entered: 07/31/1997)
2 CIVIL COVER SHEET (SKM) (Entered: 07/31/1997)
3 NOTICE of Lawsuit and request for waiver of service of summons by plaintiff EEOC (DLS) (Entered: 09/18/1997)
4 NOTICE of Lawsuit and request for waiver of service of summons by plaintiff EEOC (DLS) (Entered: 09/18/1997)
5 WAIVER Of Service by defendant Double-D Inc. on 9/4/97 (DLS) (Entered: 09/18/1997)

2 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

09/22/1997 10/06/1997 10/06/1997 10/06/1997 10/06/1997 10/06/1997 10/07/1997 10/14/1997 10/14/1997
11/24/1997 12/05/1997 12/05/1997 12/05/1997 12/15/1997 12/15/1997 12/16/1997 12/17/1997
12/24/1997

6 AMENDED COMPLAINT [1-1] by plaintiff EEOC; jury demand (FE) (Entered: 09/23/1997)
7 ANSWER by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. to Amended Complaint [6-1] (SKM) (Entered: 10/06/1997)
8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 10/06/1997)
9 WAIVER Of Service by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. on 9/15/97 (SKM) (Entered: 10/06/1997)
10 ANSWER by defendant Double-D Inc. to Amended Complaint [6-1]; jury demand (SKM) (Entered: 10/06/1997)
PRO HAC VICE fee paid by Larkin, Hoffman for Christopher Harristhal (SKM) (Entered: 10/16/1997)
11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 10/07/1997)
12 MOTION for attorney Christopher J. Harristhal to appear pro hac vice by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 10/16/1997)
12 ORDER by Lawrence L. Piersol granting motion for attorney Christopher J. Harristhal to appear pro hac vice [12-1] (cc:all counsel) (SKM) (Entered: 10/16/1997)
13 ORDER For Form 35 Report and Scheduling Information by Lawrence L. Piersol (cc: all counsel) (SLL) (Entered: 11/25/1997)
14 RULE 26 Initial Disclosures by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 12/08/1997)
15 Form 35 Report Of Parties Planning Meeting re [13-1] (FE) (Entered: 12/08/1997)
16 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 12/08/1997)
17 RULE 26 Disclosures by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SLL) (Entered: 12/15/1997)
18 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE of Mia E. Bitterman for plaintiff EEOC ; attorney Mia E. Bitterman added (SLL) (Entered: 12/15/1997)
19 MINUTES RE: telephone conference re: scheduling order before the Hon. Lawrence L. Piersol, District Judge, Sioux Falls (JMM) (Entered: 12/16/1997)
20 RULE 16 SCHEDULING ORDER by Lawrence L. Piersol; Discovery ddl set for 4/30/98; mtn filing ddl set for 5/15/98; motions hearing and pretrial conference set for 1:30 7/13/98; jury trial set for 9:30 8/11/98 (cc: all counsel) (SKM) (Entered: 12/17/1997)
21 Supplement to Form 35 Report Of Parties Planning Meeting re [13-1] (SLL) (Entered: 12/24/1997)

3 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

02/05/1998 03/04/1998 03/04/1998 03/04/1998 03/04/1998 03/09/1998 03/09/1998 03/16/1998 03/27/1998
03/27/1998 04/20/1998 04/20/1998
04/27/1998
04/27/1998 04/27/1998
05/01/1998

22 ORDER by Lawrence L. Piersol delaying depositions until noonon 2/5/98 (cc:all counsel) (JMM) (Entered: 02/06/1998)
23 NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Mary Jane Skaff on 3/17/98 at 3:00 pm (SLL) (Entered: 03/04/1998)
24 NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Mark Mueller on 3/20/98 at 9:00 am (SLL) (Entered: 03/04/1998)
25 NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Lisa Goeman on 3/20/98 at 11:00 am (SLL) (Entered: 03/04/1998)
26 NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Kelly Dwight Brady on 3/19/98 at 4:00 pm (SLL) (Entered: 03/04/1998)
27 NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Laura Wolmutt on March 17, 1998, at 9:00 AM (FE) (Entered: 03/10/1998)
28 NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Patrick Boll on March 17, 1998, at 10:30 AM (FE) (Entered: 03/10/1998)
29 NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Sandra Higgins on 3/20/98 at 2:00 pm (FE) (Entered: 03/17/1998)
30 SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 26(A)(1) by defendant Double-D Inc. re discovery [14-1] (FE) (Entered: 03/30/1998)
31 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 03/30/1998)
32 NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Bill (William) Traynor on 4/29/98 (SKM) (Entered: 04/20/1998)
33 MOTION for leave to serve more than fifty interrogatories, thirty requests for admission and thirty requests for production of documents by plaintiff EEOC (SKM) (Entered: 04/20/1998)
34 AFFIDAVIT of Nelson Alston in support of motion for leave to serve more than fifty interrogatories, thirty requests for admission and thirty requests for production of documents [33-1] (SKM) (Entered: 04/27/1998)
35 AMENDED NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of taking deposition of Bill (William) Traynor on 4/30/98 (SKM) (Entered: 04/27/1998)
36 RESPONSE by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. to motion for leave to serve more than fifty interrogatories, thirty requests for admission and thirty requests for production of documents [33-1] (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
37 REPLY by plaintiff EEOC to response to motion for leave to serve more than fifty interrogatories, thirty requests for admission and thirty requests for production of documents [33-1]; reply to Defendant Taco Bell's assertion that 3rd set of discovery was not timely served and Plaintiff has exceeded limit of 10 depositions [36-1] (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)

4 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

05/01/1998 05/02/1998 05/04/1998 05/04/1998 05/04/1998
05/04/1998 05/04/1998
05/04/1998 05/05/1998 05/05/1998 05/15/1998 05/15/1998 05/15/1998
05/15/1998 05/15/1998 05/15/1998 05/15/1998 05/15/1998 05/18/1998

37 MOTION for 3 day extension of discovery period to allow defendants to respond to Plaintiff's 3rd set of discovery by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
SEE VOLUME II (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
VOLUME II (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
38 MOTION to quash Subpoena , and for hearing on motion to quash by Interested Party Sioux Falls, City of (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
39 MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by Interested Party Sioux Falls, City of in support of motion to quash Subpoena [38-1], of motion for hearing on motion to quash [38-2] (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
40 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Interested Party Sioux Falls, City of (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
41 ORDER by Lawrence L. Piersol re: Stipulation for Protective Order and Protective Order, no basis has been established to show why file should be sealed, Court must be presented with factual basis and legal basis for consideration before file closed to public inspection (cc:all counsel) (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
42 JOINDER by defendant Double-D Inc. joining in Response to motion [DOC 36] (FE) (Entered: 05/05/1998)
43 DEPOSITION QUESTIONS for William Traynor (JMM) (Entered: 05/06/1998)
44 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendant Double-D Inc. (JMM) (Entered: 05/06/1998)
45 MOTION for summary judgment by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SLL) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
46 MEMORANDUM by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. in support of motion for summary judgment [45-1] (SLL) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
47 STATEMENT of Undisputed Material Facts by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. in support of motion for summary judgment [45-1] (SLL) Modified on 05/15/1998 (Entered: 05/15/1998)
48 AFFIDAVIT of service via Federal Express (SLL) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
49 MOTION for summary judgment by defendant Double-D Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
50 STATEMENT of Undisputed Material Facts by defendant Double-D Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
51 MEMORANDUM of Law by defendant Double-D Inc. in support of motion for summary judgment [49-1] (SKM) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
52 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendant Double-D Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 05/15/1998)
53 ORDER by Mag Judge Mark F. Marshall; telephone hearing set for 5/28/98 2:00 before Mag. Mark F. Marshall (cc:all counsel) (SKM) (Entered: 05/19/1998)

5 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

05/28/1998 05/29/1998
06/01/1998
06/05/1998 06/05/1998
06/05/1998 06/05/1998 06/05/1998 06/05/1998 06/05/1998
06/05/1998
06/05/1998
06/08/1998 06/10/1998 06/10/1998 06/12/1998 06/15/1998 06/15/1998

54 MINUTES RE: motion hearing before the Hon. Mark F. Marshall, Magistrate Judge, Sioux Falls, SD (DLS) (Entered: 05/29/1998)
55 AMENDED RULE 16 SCHEDULING ORDER by Lawrence L. Piersol ; Motion hearing and Pretrial conference 7/6/98 at 2:30; Jury trial 8/11/98 at 9:30 (cc:all counsel) (SLL) (Entered: 05/29/1998)
56 ORDER by Mag Judge Mark F. Marshall granting motion for leave to serve more than fifty interrogatories, thirty requests for admission and thirty requests for production of documents [33-1] (cc:all counsel) (DLS) (Entered: 06/03/1998)
57 Memorandum of Law in RESPONSE by defendant Double-D Inc. to motion for summary judgment as to employer's status [45-1] (FE) (Entered: 06/05/1998)
58 MOTION to strike Defendant Taco Bell's Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant Double-D's Motion for Summary Judgment by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 06/05/1998)
59 MOTION for leave to exceed 25 page limit for briefs in opposition to Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 06/05/1998)
60 STATEMENT OF DISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS by plaintiff EEOC in support of [58-1] (FE) (Entered: 06/05/1998)
61 RESPONSE by plaintiff EEOC to Defendant Taco Bell's Statement of Undisputed Material Facts [47-1] (FE) (Entered: 06/05/1998)
62 RESPONSE by plaintiff EEOC to Defendant Double-D's Statement of Undisputed Material Facts [50-1] (FE) (Entered: 06/05/1998)
63 MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff EEOC in opposition to Double-D's motion for summary judgment [49-1], and in opposition to Taco Bell's motion for summary judgment [45-1] (FE) (Entered: 06/05/1998)
64 AFFIDAVIT of Nelson G. Alston re in Support of Plaintiff's Brief in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment [63-1] with attached exhibits (IN EXPANDO) (FE) (Entered: 06/05/1998)
65 ORDER by Lawrence L. Piersol granting motion for leave to exceed 25 page limit for briefs in opposition to Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment [59-1] (cc:all counsel) (DLS) (Entered: 06/08/1998)
66 MEMORANDUM by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. in partial opposition to motion for summary judgment [49-1] (SLL) (Entered: 06/08/1998)
67 AFFIDAVIT of Service Via Federal Express Mail (SLL) (Entered: 06/10/1998)
SEE VOLUME III (SKM) (Entered: 06/16/1998)
VOLUME III (SKM) (Entered: 06/16/1998)
68 REPLY MEMORANDUM by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. in support of motion for summary judgment [45-1] (SKM) (Entered: 06/16/1998)
69 REPLY Brief by defendant Double-D Inc. re [63-1] (SKM) (Entered: 06/16/1998)

6 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

06/15/1998
06/15/1998 06/15/1998 07/02/1998 07/02/1998
07/02/1998 07/02/1998 07/06/1998 07/07/1998
07/24/1998 07/24/1998
07/24/1998
07/24/1998 07/24/1998 07/24/1998 07/24/1998 07/24/1998 07/24/1998

70 RESPONSE by defendant Double-D Inc. to motion to strike Defendant Taco Bell's Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant Double-D's Motion for Summary Judgment [58-1] (SKM) (Entered: 06/16/1998)
71 AFFIDAVIT of Scott D. Kading in support of defendant Double-D brief in support of motion for summary judgment [51-1] (SKM) (Entered: 06/16/1998)
72 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (Mailing) by defendant Double-D Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 06/16/1998)
73 SUPPLEMENTAL Memorandum of Law in Support by defendant Double-D Inc. re motion for summary judgment [49-1] (SLL) (Entered: 07/06/1998)
74 SUPPLEMENTAL Memorandum of Law in Support (Oral Argument Requested) by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. re motion for summary judgment [45-1] (SLL) (Entered: 07/06/1998)
75 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SLL) (Entered: 07/06/1998)
76 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by plaintiff EEOC (SLL) (Entered: 07/06/1998)
77 MINUTES RE: motion hearing and pretrial conference before the Hon. Lawrence L. Piersol, District Judge, Sioux Falls, SD (DLS) (Entered: 07/07/1998)
78 ORDER by Lawrence L. Piersol denying motion to strike Defendant Taco Bell's Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant Double-D's Motion for Summary Judgment [58-1] denying motion for summary judgment [45-1] denying motion for summary judgment [49-1]; Court's Amended Rule 16 Scheduling Order filed 5/29/98 remains in effect (cc:all counsel) (SLL) (Entered: 07/08/1998)
79 MOTION to sequester all witnesses by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/24/1998)
80 MOTION in limine re previous sexual harassment complaints/allegations filed by current/past employees other than the charging parties , in limine re punitive damages by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/24/1998)
81 MEMORANDUM by defendant Double-D Inc. in support of motion in limine re previous sexual harassment complaints/allegations filed by current/past employees other than the charging parties [80-1], of motion in limine re punitive damages [80-2] (FE) (Entered: 07/24/1998)
82 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/24/1998)
83 EXHIBIT LIST by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/24/1998)
84 WITNESS LIST submitted by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/24/1998)
85 PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS submitted by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
86 TRIAL EXHIBIT LIST by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
87 TRIAL WITNESS LIST submitted by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)

7 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

07/24/1998 07/24/1998 07/24/1998
07/24/1998
07/24/1998 07/24/1998
07/24/1998 07/24/1998
07/24/1998 07/24/1998 07/24/1998 07/24/1998
07/27/1998 07/28/1998 07/28/1998 07/28/1998 07/28/1998 07/28/1998

88 PROPOSED VOIR DIRE Questions submitted by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
89 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE that Cinnabon is whole separate entity from Defendants by plaintiff EEOC for (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
90 MOTION in limine to exclude testimony of Ray Schmidt and other prior employment evidence as untimely, irrelevant, improper character evidence and unfairly prejudicial by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
90 MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion in limine to exclude testimony of Ray Schmidt and other prior employment evidence as untimely, irrelevant, improper character evidence and unfairly prejudicial [90-1] (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
91 MOTION in limine to exclude use of any Cinnabon Corporate Policies by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
91 MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion in limine to exclude use of any Cinnabon Corporate Policies [91-1] (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
92 MOTION in limine to exclude introduction into evidence of State Agency Determination of "No Cause" by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
92 MEMORANDUM/BRIEF by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion in limine to exclude introduction into evidence of State Agency Determination of "No Cause" [92-1] (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
93 MOTION in limine to exclude use of inadmissible character evidence by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
93 MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion in limine to exclude use of inadmissible character evidence [93-1] (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
94 MOTION for leave to use Depositions of Lisa Goeman and William Traynor at trial by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
94 MEMORANDUM OF LAW by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion for leave to use Depositions of Lisa Goeman and William Traynor at trial [94-1] (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
SEE VOLUME IV (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
VOLUME IV (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
95 WITNESS LIST submitted by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
96 DESIGNATION of Deposition Testimony by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
97 EXHIBIT LIST by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
98 PROPOSED SPECIAL JURY VERDICT FORM submitted by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)

8 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

07/28/1998 07/28/1998 07/28/1998
07/28/1998
07/28/1998 07/28/1998 07/28/1998 07/28/1998 08/03/1998 08/03/1998 08/04/1998 08/05/1998 08/05/1998 08/05/1998 08/05/1998

99 PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS submitted by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
100 PROPOSED VOIR DIRE submitted by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
101 MOTIONS in limine re prior allegations/complaints of sexual harassment made by other than charging parties , in limine re handwritten notes of Brenda Handegard concerning alleged harassment , in limine re any alleged mental anguish suffered by Brenda Handegard , in limine re wages allegedly lost by either of charging parties , in limine re financial condition of Defendants unless Court determines Plaintiff is entitled to present punitive damage claim to jury by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
102 MEMORANDUM OF LAW by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. in support of motion in limine re prior allegations/complaints of sexual harassment made by other than charging parties [101-1], of motion in limine re handwritten notes of Brenda Handegard concerning alleged harassment [101-2], of motion in limine re any alleged mental anguish suffered by Brenda Handegard [101-3], of motion in limine re wages allegedly lost by either of charging parties [101-4], of motion in limine re financial condition of Defendants unless Court determines Plaintiff is entitled to present punitive damage claim to jury [101-5] (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
103 AFFIDAVIT of Christopher J. Harristhal (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
104 AFFIDAVIT of of Service VIA Federal Express (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
105 AFFIDAVIT of of Service Via Facsimile and Federal Express (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
106 PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS submitted by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 07/28/1998)
107 MINUTES re: dismissal of Double-D as named party defendant before the Hon. Lawrence L. Piersol (SKM) (Entered: 08/04/1998)
108 DESIGNATION of deposition testimony by plaintiff EEOC (DLS) (Entered: 08/05/1998)
109 OBJECTIONS by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. to plaintiff's exhibits [86-1] (DLS) (Entered: 08/05/1998)
110 OBJECTIONS by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. to plaintiff's designation of deposition testimony [108-1] (DLS) (Entered: 08/05/1998)
111 OBJECTIONS by plaintiff EEOC to Taco Bell's exhibit list [97-1], to Taco Bells' witness list [95-1], to Double-D's witness list [84-1], to Double-D's exhibit list [83-1] (DLS) (Entered: 08/05/1998)
112 MOTION in limine to exclude testimony of Carol Garry with regard to the Sioux Falls Human Relations Commission by plaintiff EEOC (DLS) (Entered: 08/05/1998)
113 MINUTES RE: Conference Call Hearing before the Hon. Lawrence L. Piersol, US District Court, Sioux Falls, SD. Total in Court Time 20 minutes. (FE)

9 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

08/06/1998
08/06/1998 08/06/1998 08/06/1998 08/06/1998 08/06/1998 08/07/1998 08/07/1998 08/07/1998 08/07/1998 08/07/1998 08/10/1998 08/10/1998 08/11/1998

(Entered: 08/10/1998)
114 MEMORANDUM of Law by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. in opposition to motion in limine to exclude testimony of Carol Garry with regard to the Sioux Falls Human Relations Commission [112-1], motion in limine to exclude use of inadmissible character evidence [93-1], motion in limine to exclude introduction into evidence of State Agency Determination of "No Cause" [92-1], motion in limine to exclude use of any Cinnabon Corporate Policies [91-1], motion in limine to exclude testimony of Ray Schmidt and other prior employment evidence as untimely, irrelevant, improper character evidence and unfairly prejudicial [90-1] (SKM) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/06/1998)
115 SUBPOENA for Scott Hudson returned (SKM) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/06/1998)
116 SUBPOENA for Patrick Boll returned (SKM) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/06/1998)
117 SUBPOENA for Mark Mueller returned (SKM) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/06/1998)
118 SUBPOENA for Roxie Demers returned (SKM) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/06/1998)
119 ORDER by Lawrence L. Piersol ; jury trial set for 9:30 8/20/98 , Case reassigned to John B. Jones (cc:all counsel) (SKM) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/06/1998)
120 AMENDED EXHIBIT LIST by plaintiff EEOC (DLS) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/10/1998)
121 RESPONSE by plaintiff EEOC to motion in limine re prior allegations/complaints of sexual harassment made by other than charging parties [101-1] (DLS) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/10/1998)
122 MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in opposition to motion in limine re handwritten notes of Brenda Handegard concerning alleged harassment [101-2] (DLS) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/10/1998)
123 MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in opposition to motion in limine re any alleged mental anguish suffered by Brenda Handegard [101-3] (DLS) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/10/1998)
124 MOTION in limine to exclude testimony of Carol Garry regarding Sioux Falls Human Relation Commission determination of no probable cause and supporting brief by plaintiff EEOC (DLS) Modified on 08/10/1998 (Entered: 08/10/1998)
125 AMENDED TRIAL EXHIBIT LIST by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 08/10/1998)
126 AMENDED PROPOSES JURY INSTRUCTIONS submitted by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 08/10/1998)
127 ORDER by John B. Jones setting hearing on motion in limine to exclude testimony of Carol Garry regarding Sioux Falls Human Relation Commission

10 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

08/14/1998 08/18/1998 08/18/1998 08/19/1998
08/20/1998 08/21/1998 08/21/1998
08/26/1998 08/27/1998 08/27/1998

determination of no probable cause [124-1] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine to exclude testimony of Carol Garry with regard to the Sioux Falls Human Relations Commission [112-1] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine re prior allegations/complaints of sexual harassment made by other than charging parties [101-1] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine re handwritten notes of Brenda Handegard concerning alleged harassment [101-2] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine re any alleged mental anguish suffered by Brenda Handegard [101-3] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine re wages allegedly lost by either of charging parties [101-4] 3:00 8/19/89, setting hearing on motion in limine re financial condition of Defendants unless Court determines Plaintiff is entitled to present punitive damage claim to jury [101-5] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine re previous sexual harassment complaints/allegations filed by current/past employees other than the charging parties [80-1] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine re punitive damages [80-2] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine to exclude use of inadmissible character evidence [93-1] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine to exclude introduction into evidence of State Agency Determination of "No Cause" [92-1] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine to exclude use of any Cinnabon Corporate Policies [91-1] 3:00 8/19/98, setting hearing on motion in limine to exclude testimony of Ray Schmidt and other prior employment evidence as untimely, irrelevant, improper character evidence and unfairly prejudicial [90-1] 3:00 8/19/98 (cc:all counsel) (LMZ) Modified on 09/01/1998 (Entered: 08/11/1998)
128 FIRST AMENDED OBJECTIONS by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. to Plaintiff's Exhibits [125-1] (SLL) (Entered: 08/14/1998)
129 STIPULATED MOTION for Dismissal with Prejudice by parties; dismissing defendant Double-D, Inc. as party (SKM) (Entered: 08/19/1998)
130 ORDER by John B. Jones granting stipulation for dismissal of party [129-1] dismissing party Double-D Inc. (cc:all counsel) (SKM) (Entered: 08/19/1998)
131 MINUTES RE: Motions in Limine and Motions Hearing before the Hon. John B. Jones, Sr. District Judge, Sioux Falls, SD. Total In Court Time 1 hour 35 minutes (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
132 JURY LIST (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
133 SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF FACTS by plaintiff EEOC re response [61-1] (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
134 NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO DEFENDANT DOUBLE-D, INC. by defendant Double-D Inc. (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
135 PROPOSED ADDENDUM JURY INSTRUCTIONS for Jury Instructions #7, #16, #19 submitted by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
136 JURY TRIAL EXHIBIT LIST by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
137 JURY TRIAL EXHIBIT LIST by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)

11 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

08/27/1998 08/27/1998 08/27/1998 08/27/1998
08/27/1998
08/27/1998 09/08/1998
09/17/1998 09/17/1998 09/18/1998 09/21/1998 09/21/1998 10/09/1998 10/09/1998 10/09/1998
10/09/1998 10/09/1998 10/26/1998 12/17/1998

138 JURY INSTRUCTIONS read to jury and submitted to jury by Court for use in deliberations (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
139 JURY QUESTION (Number 1) (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
140 SUPPLEMENTAL JURY INSTRUCTION No. 1 submitted in reply to Jury Question No. 1 (DOC 139) (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
141 SPECIAL VERDICT FORM FOR KARLA ZICK, verdict for defendant Taco Bell, Inc. against plaintiff EEOC (FE) Modified on 08/28/1998 (Entered: 08/28/1998)
142 SPECIAL VERDICT FORM FOR BRENDA HANDEGARD, verdict for defendant Taco Bell, Inc. against plaintiff EEOC, no damages awarded (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
143 MINUTES RE: Jury Trial Proceedings before the Hon. John B. Jones, Sr. District Judge, Sioux Falls, SD. Total in Court Time 5 Days (FE) (Entered: 08/28/1998)
144 JUDGMENT ON JURY VERDICE in favor of Taco Bell, Inc. and against EEOC by John B. Jones; dismissing the complaint [1-1] dismissing case with prejudice (cc: all counsel) (SLL) (Entered: 09/08/1998)
145 ACCEPTANCE/ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE of subpoenas by defendant Double-D Inc. on 8/3/98 (DLS) (Entered: 09/18/1998)
SEE VOLUME V (FE) (Entered: 09/22/1998)
VOLUME V (FE) (Entered: 09/22/1998)
146 MOTION and Supporting Brief for judgment notwithstanding the Verdict , or/alternatively for new trial by plaintiff EEOC (FE) (Entered: 09/22/1998)
147 AFFIDAVIT of Mia E. Bitterman re [146-1], re [146-2] (FE) (Entered: 09/22/1998)
148 MOTION to amend answer by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 10/13/1998)
149 MEMORANDUM by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. in support of motion to amend answer [148-1] (SKM) (Entered: 10/13/1998)
150 MEMORANDUM of Law by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. in opposition to motion for judgment notwithstanding the Verdict [146-1], motion for new trial [146-2] (SKM) (Entered: 10/13/1998)
151 AFFIDAVIT of Christopher J. Harristhal (SKM) (Entered: 10/13/1998)
152 AFFIDAVIT of Service via facsimile and Federal Express of Sherri Marsh (SKM) (Entered: 10/13/1998)
153 MOTION to vacate order quashing subpoena duces tecum by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SKM) (Entered: 10/28/1998)
154 ORDER by John B. Jones granting motion to amend answer [148-1], denying motion to vacate order quashing subpoena duces tecum [153-1], denying motion for judgment notwithstanding the Verdict [146-1], denying motion for new trial

12 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM

South Dakota District Court Version 1.1 LIVE DATABASE - Docket R... https://ecf.sdd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?462338050791192-L_92...

03/25/1999 03/25/1999 04/12/1999 04/12/1999 04/12/1999 04/12/1999 04/21/1999 04/21/1999 05/07/1999
03/07/2000 03/07/2000

[146-2] (cc:all counsel) (LMZ) (Entered: 12/17/1998)
155 BILL OF COSTS submitted by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. re Judgment on Jury Verdict [144-2] (FE) (Entered: 03/26/1999)
156 AFFIDAVIT of Christopher J. Harristhal re Bill of Costs [155-1] (FE) (Entered: 03/26/1999)
157 MEMORANDUM/BRIEF (with attached Exhibits G, H) by plaintiff EEOC in opposition to defendants Bill of Costs [155-1] (SLL) (Entered: 04/12/1999)
157 COMBINED MOTION and brief in support (with attached Exhibits G,H) for granting costs to both parties by plaintiff EEOC (SLL) (Entered: 04/12/1999)
158 BILL OF COSTS submitted by plaintiff EEOC re [144-2] (SLL) (Entered: 04/12/1999)
159 AFFIDAVIT (with Exhibits A-F) of Nelson G. Alston in support of plaintiff's bill of costs [158-1] (SLL) (Entered: 04/12/1999)
160 BRIEF/MEMORANDUM by plaintiff EEOC in support of bill of costs [155-1] (SLL) (Entered: 04/22/1999)
161 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by defendant Taco Bell, Inc. (SLL) (Entered: 04/22/1999)
162 ORDER by John B. Jones denying bill of costs [155-1] denying motion for granting costs to both parties [157-1]; each party to bear its own costs (cc:all counsel) (JMM) (Entered: 05/07/1999)
163 LETTER re: defendant's exhibits - exhibits returned to counsel - receipt never returned (JMM) (Entered: 03/07/2000)
164 RECEIPT for plaintiff's exhibits (JMM) (Entered: 03/07/2000)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/27/2006 13:58:00

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 8

Cost:

BLOOM 4:97-cv-04160-JBJ 0.64

13 of 13

6/27/2006 1:58 PM