EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
V.
CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC., Defendant

CML ACTION NO. JURY TRIAL DEMAND

~. NA~. OF: THE ~ACTION ¯ . This,isan action.under Title Vll of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and to provide appropriate relief to employees who were adversely affected by the practices. The Commission alleges that Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc.; discriminated against Samuel Baxter, Matthew Cullingsford, Travorous Green, Jordan Holley, David Jeffreys, Leonard Lewis, Jr., Jonathan Smith, Jr. and other, similarly situated male employees by subjecting them to sexual harassment and a sexually hostile work environment because of their sex.
1.:~’ ,. Jurisdiction of-this Court’ istnvbkd~!!l)t/rstm~t.to 28U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337, 1343 and 1345~,Tlfi~ action is authorized and ;,iriS~’t~(~~ pta~su~ttt:.to¯ Section 706(0(1) and (3) of Title VII of theCivil Rights Act of 1964, as.amerided,~ 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) ("Title VII"), .and Section 102 ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991,.42 U.S.C, ~§1981a.

2. The employment practicesl alleged tobe..unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United.States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina,

3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"),

is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and

enforcement of Title VH of the Civil Rights Act and is expressly authorized to bring this action by

Sections 706(0(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(f)(1) and (3).

4. At all relevant times, Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc. ("Defendant") has continuously been a Delaware corporatiOn’doii~g business.in the State o fNorth Carolina and the City

of Raleigh and has continuously had at least fifteen ’employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an

industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701 Co), (g) and (h) of Title VI/, 42

U.S.C. §§2000e(b), (g) and (h).

¯

STATI~MENT OF CLAIMS

6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Samuel Baxter, Matthew

Cullingsford, Travorous Green, Jordan Holley, ¯David Jeffrcys, Leonard Lewis, Jr. and Jonathan

Smith, Jr. filed charges with the Commission~: alleging.violations of Title VII by Defendant. All

conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.

7. From around February 2003 until around October 2003, Defendant engaged in

unlawful employment practices at one of its movie theaters located in Raleigh, North Carolina, in

violation of Section 703(a)(1) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-2(a)(1). Specifically, Defendant

subjected Samuel Baxter, Matthew CuIlingsford, Travorous Green, Jordan Holley, David Jeffreys,

Leonard Lewis, Jr., Jonathan Smith, Jr. and other similarly situated male employees to discrimination

2

based on their sex by subjecting them to sexual harassment that created a sexually hostile work environment. The sexual harassment was perpetrated by an adult male supervisor in the direct line of authority over the aggrieved individuals, most of whom were teenagers. The sexual harassment included unwelcome sexual touching, egregious sexual comments, sexual advances and requests for sexual favors. Although Defendant received complaints from some of the aggrieved individuals and otherwise knew about the sexual harassment of its male employees by their male supervisor, Defendant failed to take reasonable steps to prvvent or correct the sexual harassment.
8. The ffect of the practices complained of in paragraph 7 above has been to deprive Samuel Baxter, Matthew Cullingsford, Travorous Green, Jordan Holley, David Jeffrcys, Leonard Lewis, Jr., Jonathan Smith, Jr. and other similarly situated male employees of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect their status as employees because of their sex, male.
o The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were intentional.
I0. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Samuel Baxter, Matthew Cullingsford, Travorous G-teen, Jordan Holley, David Jeffrcys, Leonard Lewis, Jr., Jonathan Smith, Jr. and other similarly situated male employees.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully rccluests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from maintaining a sexually hostile work environment and from any other employment practice that discriminates on the basis of sex.
3

B. Order Defendant to institute and carry OUt policies, practices, and programs that provide equal employment opportunities for men and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.
C. Order Defendant to make whole Samuel Baxter, Matthew Cullingsford, Travorous Green, Jordan Holley, David Jeffreys, Leonard Lewis, Jr., Jonathan Smith, Jr. and other similarly situated male employees by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraph 7 above, including medical expenses, in amounts to be determined at trial.
D. Order Defendant to make whole Samuel Baxter, Matthew Cullingsford, Travorous Green, Jordan Holley, David Jeffreys, Leonard Lewis, Jr., Jonathan Smith, Jr. and other similarly. situated male employees by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraph 7 above, including but not limited to emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation, loss of selfesteem, and loss of civil rights, in amounts to be determined at trial.
E. Order Defendant to pay Samuel Baxter, Matthew Cullingsford, Travorous Green, Jordan Holley, David Jeffreys, Leonard Lewis, Jr., Jonathan Smith, Jr. and other similarly situated male employees punitive damages for its malicious and reckless conduct, as described above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public
Award the Commission its costs of this action.
4

7tJRY TRIAL DEMAND
The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its complaint. DATED this the [ ~0"~ day of September 2004.
Respectfully submitted,
ERIC S. DREIBAND General Counsel
JAMES L. LEE Deputy General Counsel
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 L Street, N.W.
LYNE’I~E A,B~S Acting Regional Attorney EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Charlotte District Office 129 W. Trade Street, Suite 400 Charlotte, N.C. 28202
ZOE MAHOOD Senior Trial Attorney ¯ EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Raleigh Area Office 1309 Annapolis Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27608-2129 Telephone: 919.856.4080 Facsimile: 919.856.4156
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF
5

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Civil Action No: 5:04-CV-673 - B~ I)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

)

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

Defendant.

)

)

)

WILLIE HOLLEY & PAULA HOLLEY)

as Guardians of minor J. Holley;

)

LENORA BAXTER DUNSTON &

)

SAM DUNSTON as Guardians of

)

minor S. BAXTER;

)

EVA HODGE & DEREK HODGE as )

Guardians of minor D. HODGE;

)

JACQUELINE SMITH & JONATHAN )

SMITH, Sr. as Guardians of

)

minor J. SMITH;

)

TANETTE BROWN as Guardian of )

minor J. ROBINSON;

)

LEONARD LEWIS, JR.; TARVOROUS )

GREEN; DAVID JEFFREYS;

)

MATTHEW CULLINGFORD; &

)

CHAD MARTIN;

)

Plaintiffs,

)

v.

)

)

CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

Defendant.

)

COMPLAINT (JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)

NOW COME Plaintiffs Willie Holley & Paula Holley as Guardians and Parents of minor J. Holley; Lenora Baxter Dunston & Sam Dunston as Guardians and Parents of minor S. Baxter; Eva Hodge & Derek Hodge as Guardians and Parents of minor D. Hodge; Jacqueline Smith & Jonathan Smith, Sr. as Guardians and Parents of minor J. Smith; Tanette Brown as
I

Guardian and Parent of minor J. Robinson; Leonard Lewis, Jr.; Tarvorous Green; David Jefferys; Matthew Cullingford; and Chad Martin, complaining of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc. as follows:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This action is authorized by and instituted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(l) and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) ofTitle VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the common law of the State of North Carolina. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343. Supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims is conferred on this court by 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 2. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.c. § 1391(b) as the unlawful employment practices alleged in this Complaint were committed within the geographical jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
PARTIES 3. Willie Holley & Paula Holley are the parents of minor J. Holley, a former employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and are residents of Raleigh, North Carolina. 4. Lenora Baxter-Dunston & Sam Dunston are the parents of minor S. Baxter, an employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and are residents of Knightdale, North Carolina. 5. Eva Hodge & Derek Hodge are the parents of minor D. Hodge, a former employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and are residents of North Carolina. 6. Jacqueline Smith & Jonathan Smith, Sr. are the parents of minor J. Smith, a former employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and are residents of Wake Forest, North Carolina.
2

7, Tanette Brown is the parent of minor J, Robinson, a former employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and is a resident of Raleigh, North Carolina,
8, Leonard Lewis, Jr" a Raleigh, North Carolina resident, is a former employee of Carmike Cinemas. Although currently over the age of 18, at relevant times of his employment with Carmike, Lewis was a minor.
9, Tarvorous Green, a Raleigh, North Carolina resident, is a former employee of Carmike Cinemas, Although currently over the age of 18, at relevant times of his employment with Carmike, Green was a minor,
10. David Jefferys, a Wake Forest, North Carolina resident, is a former employee of Carmike Cinemas, Although currently over the age of 18, at relevant times of his employment with Carmike, Jefferys was a minor.
II. Matthew Cullingford, a Knightdale, North Carolina resident, is a former employee of Carmike Cinemas, Although currently over the age of 18, at relevant times of his employment with Carmike, Cullingford was a minor.
12, Chad Martin, a resident of Raleigh, North Carolina, is a former employee of Carmike Cinemas,
13, These ten named Plaintiffs in whole or in part shall be collectively referred to as "Named Plaintiffs,"
FACTS 14, Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc, (hereinafter "Carmike") operates a movIe theater located at 5501 Atlantic Springs Road, Raleigh, North Carolina, where all Named Plaintiffs worked,
3

15. Based upon infonnation and belief, Antonio Hines is a known sexual offender,

with two convictions for Taking Indecent Liberties with Minors for which he served an active

sentence of incarceration. Hines' record as a sexual offender was published in the North

Carolina

Sex

Offender

&

Public

Protection

Registry

at

http://sbi.jus.state.nc.us/DOJHAHT/SORIDefauit.htm on the internet and other locations in the

community.

16. Based upon infonnation and belief, Johnnie Camp, General Manager of

Carrnike's Raleigh theater at times relevant to this suit, had a felony record.

17. Based upon infonnation and belief, Josh Mitton, a manager at Carrnike's Raleigh

theater at times relevant to this suit, was the roommate of Antonio Hines.

18. On or about February 2003, Carrnike hired Antonio Hines.

19. Based upon infonnation and belief, Carrnike hired Antonio Hines without

investigating or inquiring whether Hines had a serious criminal record.

20. Based upon infonnation and belief, Carrnike hired Hines without providing Hines

proper training regarding sexual harassment.

21. Within a short time of being hired, Cannike promoted Hines to the position of

manager.

22. Based upon infonnation and belief, Carrnike promoted Antonio Hines to the

position of manager without investigating or inquiring whether Hines had a serious criminal

record.

23. Carrnike employs a number of minors to work in its theaters.

24. Upon infonnation and belief, as a manager, Hines had direct supervisory authority

over all Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees.

4

25. Manager Antonio Hines had authority to train, interview, recommend for employment or termination, counsel and control the working conditions of subordinate employees.
26. Upon information and belief, Hines systematically used his managerial authority to aid his practice of sexually harassing young male employees at the theater.
27. As a concessions manager, Hines had a key to various "candy closets" in the theater where candy, concessions, drinks and supplies were stored.
28. Named Plaintiffs and other lower level subordinates did not have access to these locked closets and required the assistance and direction of a manager to retrieve items from the closet.
29. On multiple and daily occasions, Hines asked young male employees including but not limited to the Named Plaintiffs to assist him in the "candy closet."
30. Inside the "candy closet" or in other places in the theater out of sight of other employees and patrons, Antonio Hines subjected all Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees including Demetrius Wilson to the following acts of physical sexual harassment - without authorization and in a sexual manner: touching, massaging, groping and fondling the nipples, buttocks, genital area, chest, back and shoulders of young male employees; blocking the subordinate's exit from the closet; kissing; hugging and propositioning subordinates for oral sex or attempting such acts.
31. On multiple and daily occasions, Antonio Hines would subject male subordinate employees, including all Named Plaintiffs, to persuasive, graphic and lurid verbal comments, suggestions, and propositions including but not limited to: "Whip it out so I can suck your dick." "You're going to be my boyfriend." "Have you thought about it?" "Have you ever sucked a
5

dick?" " Let me see your friend." "I knew you would get hired because you're sexy." "Let me suck it." "Come here big dick." "You're sexy." "You know you want me to suck your dick." "Come here with your sexy self."
32. Antonio Hines used his managerial position to proposition sexual favors quid pro quo in exchange for favorable working conditions and increased hours.
33. When Named Plaintiffs rejected Hines' advances, Hines would or threaten to change their job duties adversely.
34. Antonio Hines sexually harassed Demetrius Wilson physically and verbally while he was a subordinate.
35. Wilson reported Hines behavior to Carmike managers Williams and Franklin, but Carmike failed to stop Hines' sexual harassment of Wilson.
36. Only after Wilson was also promoted to a management level position did Antonio Hines stop his sexual harassment of Wilson.
37. Although Hines stopped sexually harassing manager Wilson, Wilson and other Carmike managers knew that Antonio Hines continued to sexually harass other subordinate male employees.
38. While a manager Wilson complained to his supervisors at Carmike that several young boys would frequently enter the theater and movies for free as the guests of Manager Antonio Hines, a sexual offender, and that Hines was unfit and inadequately performed his job duties as a manager.
39. In or about April 2003, while in the "candy closet" alone, Hines placed both hands on the shoulders of former employee Isaiah Simmons and verbally made a statement regarding oral sex.
6

40. Simmons left the candy closet and immediately reported Hines' sexual advance to management the same day.
41. Simmons reported the incident to Carmike's General Manager Johnnie Camp. 42. On behalf of Carmike, General Manager Camp provided Simmons a form to report the incident. 43. Simmons completed the written form and documented Hines' behavior to Carmike. 44. Upon information and belief, no formal investigation of Simmons' complaint occurred although other members of management and employees including the Named Plaintiffs were told of Simmons' complaint. 45. After his initial complaint, Simmons was not interviewed, and Hines continued his employment in a managerial position. 46. In approximately May 2003, Simmons refused to serve a belligerent customer who had used profanity towards him, pursuant to the guidelines of Carmike's employment handbook. 47. Based on Antonio Hines' recommendation and investigation of the incident, Carmike terminated Simmons. 48. All Named Plaintiffs were continually sexually harassed and subjected to a sexually hostile work environment after Isaiah Simmons complained to Carmike about Hines' conduct, and Carmike terminated Isaiah Simmons. 49. Based on the retaliatory discharge of Isaiah Simmons and the lack of disciplinary action taken against Antonio Hines, Carmike employees were hesitant and fearful of making reports of sexual harassment.
7

50. While supervising Plaintiff Chad Martin and two other employees, Antonio Hines directed the two other employees to leave the area to perfonn other tasks. After the two employees left and Hines was alone was with Plaintiff Martin, Hines directed Martin to remove candy from the closet. Hines blocked the exit to closet, forcing Martin to come into physical contact with Hines' waist and midsection. Hines then attempted to massage Martin's shoulders. This physical contact with Hines was unwelcome.
51. Immediately after the unwelcome contact, Martin left the closet and reported the sexual advance to Carmike's managers Josh Mitton and Demetrius Wilson.
52. Both managers acknowledged Martin's report of sexual harassment but did not document the incident in writing and took no further action on Martin's report.
53. Based upon infonnation and belief, Cannike again failed to investigate Hines' conduct pursuant to Martin's complaint to management. Martin was not interviewed. Hines was not disciplined and maintained his managerial position and authority.
54. While training Plaintiff Lewis, manager Antonio Hines called Lewis into an office to discuss working more hours. Hines stated that he would schedule Lewis for more hours. While alone in the office with Lewis, Antonio Hines kneeled on one knee. Hines then grabbed the back of Lewis' legs and thrust his head into Lewis' genital area. To defend himself, Lewis punched Hines. This physical contact with Hines was unwelcome.
55. Lewis reported this incident to management including manager Regina Williams. 56. Upon infonnation and belief, Lewis' complaint was not documented in writing or properJ y investigated.
8

57. Cannike failed to take action against Hines. Antonio Hines maintained his managerial authority and continued to sexually harass, verbally and physically, Lewis and other male subordinates including the Named Plaintiffs.
58. After reporting the incident, Lewis suffered repeated embarrassment and ridicule in the workplace when co-employees gossiped about the sexual assault and asked Lewis about the assault.
59. Hines' sexual assault of Lewis in the office of Cannike was widely discussed and caused Lewis unbearable anxiety, depression and embarrassment.
60. Due to Cannike's lack of action taken against Antonio Hines and the humiliation of working in a sexually hostile work environment where reports of sexual of harassment were not investigated or kept private from the knowledge of other employees, Plaintiff Lewis could not continue his employment and resigned,
61. Manager Regina Williams admitted to Judith Cullingford, Plaintiff Matthew Cullingford's mother, and to other Named Plaintiffs that she had verbally counseled Antonio Hines regarding his behavior.
62. Despite the reports to management made by Isaiah Simmons, Chad Martin, Leonard Lewis and other Named Plaintiffs, Antonio Hines continued to sexually harass Cannike employees, both physically and verbally, from the point that he was promoted to manager to October 2003.
63. Upon information and belief, Cannike's management had direct knowledge of Hines' conduct and failed to protect its employees from a sexually hostile work environment.
64. In October 2003, Antonio Hines was arrested for Failure to Register as a Sex Offender.
9

65. After realizing that Carmike would never take any action to discipline Antonio Hines for the sexual assault that occurred in the office of the theater, Plaintiff Lewis filed a criminal assault charge against Antonio Hines.
66. In Wake County, North Carolina, Antonio Hines pled guilty to assaulting Leonard Lewis, was sentenced to an active term of incarceration but has since been released.
67. Numerous managers including but not limited Johnnie Camp, Regina Williams, Josh Mitton, Mr. Franklin and Demetrius Wilson were advised of or aware of manager Antonio Hines' persuasive and continual sexual harassment of Named Plaintiffs and other employees.
68. No action was taken by Carmike Cinemas, Inc. to discipline or stop the known conduct of Antonio Hines, a twice-convicted sexual offender.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT HIRING, PROMOTION & RETENTION 69. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-68 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein. 70. Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc. has a duty to the public and its employees to hire, promote and retain persons competent and fit to perform their job duties without violating rights of other employees. 71. Defendant Carmike has a duty to investigate the suitability and record of persons it hires. 72. Defendant Carmike has a duty to investigate the suitability and record of persons it promotes particularly when the promotion bestows authority over minor employees.
10

73. Defendant Cannike has a duty to investigate the suitability of a person that it retains as an employee when there has been evidence and reports of immoral, illegal and tortious conduct by an employee.
74. Defendant Cannike had a pattern and practice of hiring, promoting and retaining employees without even the most basic inquiry or investigation to determine whether the employee had been convicted of a felony.
75. Defendant Cannike often promoted individuals with senous felony records including Antonio Hines and the General Manager for the theater Johnnie Camp.
76. Cannike's promotion process did not include an examination or review of the employee's suitability to possess supervisory authority or the employee's criminal record prior to giving the employee managerial authority over employees, a large number of whom are minors.
77. Defendant Carmike received numerous complaints of Hines' sexual harassment of its employees and had actual notice or should have reasonably known that Antonio Hines was unfit to employ as a manager.
78. Defendant Cannike breached its duty to its employees and the public by hiring Antonio Hines without inquiring or investigating his criminal record.
79. Defendant Cannike breached its duty to the public and its employees by promoting Antonio Hines to a managerial position without inquiring or investigating his criminal record.
80. Defendant Cannike breached its duty to the public and its employees by retaining Antonio Hines as a manager despite numerous reports that Hines sexually harassed, both physically and verbally, employees including Named Plaintiffs.
11

81. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Carmike's breach of its duties in hiring, promoting and retaining Antonio Hines, all Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees were subjected to physical and verbal sexual harassment in a sexually hostile environment.
82. All Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees suffered the humiliation, frustration, and anxiety of experiencing sexual harassment from a member of the same sex.
83. Named Plaintiffs also incurred medical expenses for physical and psychological treatment and sustained lost wages.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT TRAINING & SUPERVISION 84. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-83 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein. 85. Defendant Carmike has a legal duty to train its employees and managers on sexual harassment and the procedures for reporting and investigating instances of sexual harassment. 86. Defendant Carmike has a legal duty to supervise its employees and managers to ensure that its employees and mangers are not subjecting others to sexual harassment and are knowledgeable on the adequate procedures to report and investigate claims of sexual harassment. 87. Defendant Carmike breached its duty to adequately training and supervise its employees and managers on sexual harassment, the reporting of sexual harassment and investigation of sexual harassment complaints.
12

88. But for the breach of Defendant Cannike's duty in training and supervlsmg Antonio Hines, Defendant Cannike's managers and other employees, all Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees were subjected to physical and verbal sexual harassment in a sexually hostile environment.
89. All Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees suffered the humiliation, frustration, and anxiety of experiencing sexual harassment from a member of the same sex.
90. Named Plaintiffs also incurred medical bills for physical and psychological treatment, and damages of lost wages.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION ASSAULT
91. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-90 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein.
92. Cannike's manager Antonio Hines used his managerial authority to systematically assault and touch, in a sexual manner, without authorization aU Named Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees.
93. Although Cannike and its managers had direct reports of Hines' assaults and Cannike should have reasonably known of Hines' assaults on all Named Plaintiffs, Cannike failed to repudiate the tortious acts of Antonio Hines or to terminate Antonio Hines' employment.
94. Antonio Hines pled guilty to and received an active sentence of incarceration for assaulting Intervener Leonard Lewis, Jr.
13

95. The assault of Lewis occurred in an office at Cannike Cinemas while manager Antonio Hines was attempting to solicit oral sex from Lewis , quid pro quo, for extended working hours.
96. Other assaults on Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees occurred in the "candy closet," after Manager Antonio Hines had unlocked the closet and directed employees in the course of their job duties to retrieve items from the closet.
97. Alleged assaults occurred within the course and scope ofCannike employees' job duties.
98. Alleged assaults occurred in the furtherance ofCannike's business. 99. Cannike's pattern of conduct, despite numerous reports of Hines' behavior to management, ratified Hines' conduct and assaults.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION SEXUAL HARASSMENT
100. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-99 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein.
10J. In violation of Title VII, Section 2000e-2(a)(I), Cannike engaged in unlawful and tortious employment practices at its Raleigh theater and subjected all Named Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees to discrimination based on their sex by SUbjecting them to sexual harassment of Carmike manager Antonio Hines, creating a sexually hostile work environment.
102. Carmike's employment practices deprived Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees of equal employment opportunities and adversely affected their status as employees because of their sex, male.
14

103. Cannike's actions and omISSIOns were done with malice, intentional or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Named Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees.
FIFI'H CAUSE OF ACTION RETALIATION I CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE 104. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-103 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein. 105. In addition to maintaining a sexually hostile work environment, Defendant Cannike has a pattern and practice of retaliating against employees that make reports of sexual harassment. 106. Cannike does not have or does not adequately enforce a policy to protect its employees from retaliation. 107. Cannike does not have or does not adequately train its employees and managers on a procedure for reporting acts of retaliation. !O8. Named Plaintiffs engaged in a protected activity when they reported the sexual harassment of Antonio Hines. 109. Either after reporting to or discussing Hines' sexual harassment with management or filing a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC documenting Hines' sexual harassment, Cannike retaliated against Named Plaintiffs. 11 O. Cannike retaliated by reducing work hours, arbitrarily sending home, substantially changing the working conditions to perform less desirable work tasks, suspending, terminating, ignoring complaints and wrongfully disciplining said employee-Named Plaintiffs.
15

111. In November 2003, Carmike's management asked Plaintiff Cullingford, a minor at the time, to provide a recorded statement to their attorney. Ms. Cullingford, Plaintiffsmother refused to allow her son to provide a statement without the guidance and representation of an attorney for the employee.
112. After refusing to provide a statement without the presence of an attorney, Carmike reduced the work hours and made later Cullingford's hours of employment.
113. After Named Plaintiffs filed complaints of Antonio Hines' sexual harassment at Carmike with the EEOC, manager Josh Mitton, a former roommate of Hines, retaliated against Named Plaintiffs.
114. Manager Josh Mitton gave Plaintiff Baxter three written reprimands on consecutive days.
115. Manager Josh Mitton terminated Plaintiff Holley for job abandonment after Mitton advised Holley that he was approved for time off.
116. After manager Josh Mitton performed these acts of retaliation, Carmike awarded Josh Mitton with a promotion.
117. After his sexual harassment complaint was made, the count sheet of Plaintiff Green was altered to give the appearance that his inventory and money were not properly maintained.
118. After his sexual harassment complaint was made, Green advised management that another employee had hit him in the face with a broom, manager Winstead told Green that he understood why she had hit Green in the face, and no action was taken against the other employee.
16

119. After employees Lindsey Widenhouse, Isaiah Simmons and Abdul-Wadud Jabal

made complaints of sexual harassment, all were terminated.

120. In August 2004, Lindsey Widenhouse made a complaint to manager Theresa

Bryant that she was being sexually harassed by manager Brenden Davis.

121. In September 2004, Lindsey Widenhouse was fired on the approximately or the

same day that Jabal, who complained of the sexual harassment of Antonio Hines, was also

terminated.

122. The pattern practice and purpose of said terminations was to intimidate other

employees from making complaints of sexual harassment and to coerce employees with pending

sexual harassment complaints before the EEOC to resign or quit.

123. After the terminations of co-employee(s) that made similar sexual harassment

complaints and repeated acts of retaliation, Named Plaintiffs Holley, Green, Cullingford,

Martin, Lewis and Smith were constructively discharged and could no longer endure the

intolerable, sexually hostile work environment and constant threat of retaliatory termination that

were created by Carmike.

124.

There is a causal link between the protected activities of Named Plaintiffs,

and the aforementioned retaliatory acts of Defendant Carmike.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION INTENTIONAL/NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 125. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-124 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein. 126. The conduct ofCarmike manager Antonio Hines was extreme and outrageous.

17

'.
127. The conduct and omissions of Cannike that allowed Antonio Hines to continually sexually harass a large number of minor employees was extreme and outrageous.
128. The physical and sexual attack that Leonard Lewis experienced was extreme and outrageous.
129. Cannike ratified manager Antonio Hines' behavior by failing to repudiate Hines' behavior and failure to discipline or terminate Hines.
130. Cannike intentionally or negligently with reckless indifference acted - or failed to act - to cause sever emotional distress to Leonard Lewis, Jr.
13!. Leonard Lewis did suffer severe emotional distress manifested, psychologically and physiologically that were caused by the acts or omissions of Cannike.
132. As a result of the depression, anxiety and stress of the sexual assault and harassment of Carmike's manager Antonio Hines, Lewis suffered repeated nausea necessitating medical treatment.
133. Leonard Lewis incurred bills for psychological counseling and medical treatment related to his injuries complained.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Named Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:
1. Permanently enjoin Cannike from maintaining a sexually hostile work environment, continuing other employment practices that discriminate on the basis of sex, and allowing retaliation against employees that report sexual harassment.
2. Permanently enjoin Cannike Cinemas from employing Antonio Hines as an employee or manager.
18

· .
3. Order Cannike to inquire whether applicants have been convicted of a felony offense.
4. Order Cannike to investigate the criminal records of all promotions to manager when the manager will be bestowed managerial authority over minors.
5. Award compensatory damages . based on past and future emotional pain, suffering, humiliation loss of civil rights and medical expenses . and punitive damages for Cannike's malicious and reckless conduct to make Named Plaintiffs whole, as detennined by a JUry.
6. Award Named Plaintiffs costs and attorney fees of pursuing this action.
This the 9th day of December, 2004.
BROWNE, FLEBOTTE, WILSON, HORN & WEBB, PLLC
N.C. State Bar No. 22286 Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Intervenors P.O. Box 2247 Durham, North Carolina 27702 Telephone: (919) 688·7393 ext. 225 Facsimile: (919) 683·6323
C~!' &w,Clf!JI-pw
N.C. State Bar No. 28267 301 S. McDowell Street, Suite 1201 Charlotte, North Carolina 28204 Telephone: (704) 370·7771 Facsimile: (704) 370·7798
19

... -. ..
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day, the foregoing was served upon all parties in this action by mailing a copy thereof at the address indicated below by first class, postpaid United States mail, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This the 9th day of December, 2004.
BROWNE, FLEBOTTE, WILSON, HORN & WEBB, PLLC

N.C. State Bar No. 22286 Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Intervenors P.O. Box 2247 Durham, North Carolina 27702 Telephone: (919) 688-7393 ext. 225 Facsimile: (919) 683-6323

SERVED:
Lynette A. Barnes, Esq. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Charlotte District Office 129 W. Trade Street, Suite 400 Charlotte, North Carolina 28202
Zoe Mahood, Esq. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Raleigh Area Office 1309 Annapolis Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27608

Michael Eric Ross, Esq. Laura K. Johnson, Esq. King & Spaulding LLP 191 Peachtree Street Atlanta, GA 30303-1763
Patricia T. Bartis, Esq. Parker, Poe, Adams & Bernstein, L.L.P. P.O. Box 389 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0389

20

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLIl"A

FILED
APR 1 9 2005

Civil Action No: 5:04-CV-673-BO(1)

BYuFsROElSOTVRt,~CeMOUIllR, C~L~ENRIC( P eLK

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

)

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

Defendant.

)

)

)

COMPLAINT OF

WILLIE HOLLEY & PAULA HOLLEY)

ALVIN FAIREY

as Guardians of minor J. Holley;

)

LENORA BAXTER DUNSTON &

)

(JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)

SAM DUNSTON as Guardians of

)

minor S. BAXTER;

)

EVA HODGE & DEREK HODGE as )

Guardians of minor D. HODGE;

)

JACQUELINE SMITH & JONATHAN )

SMITH, Sr. as Guardians of

)

minor J. SMITH;

)

TANETTE BROWN as Guardian of )

minor J. ROBINSON;

)

LEONARD LEWIS, JR.; TARVOROUS )

GREEN; DAVID JEFFREYS;

)

MATTHEW CULLINGFORD; &

)

CHAD MARTIN; ALVIN FAIREY, )

Plaintiff-Intervenors)

v.

)

)

CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

Defendant.

)

NOW COMES Plaintiff Alvin Fairey, by and through undersigned counsel, and complains of Defendant as follows:

1

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. This action is authorized by and instituted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e5(f)(1) and 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the common law of the State of North Carolina. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343. Supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims is conferred on this court by 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 2. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) as the unlawful employment practices alleged in this Complaint were committed within the geographical jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
PARTIES 3. Willie Holley & Paula Holley are the parents of minor J. Holley, a former employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and are residents of Raleigh, North Carolina. 4. Lenora Baxter-Dunston & Sam Dunston are the parents of minor S. Baxter, an employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and are residents of Knightdale, North Carolina. 5. Eva Hodge & Derek Hodge are the parents of minor D. Hodge, a former employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and are residents of North Carolina. 6. Jacqueline Smith & Jonathan Smith, Sr. are the parents of minor J. Smith, a former employee of Defendant Carmike Cinemas, and are residents of Wake Forest, North Carolina.
2

7. Tanette Brown is the parent of minor J. Robinson, a former employee of

Defendant Carrnike Cinemas, and is a resident of Raleigh, North Carolina.

8. Leonard Lewis, Jr., a Raleigh, North Carolina resident, is a former

employee of Carrnike Cinemas.

9.

Tarvorous Green, a Raleigh, North Carolina resident, is a former

employee of Carrnike Cinemas. Although currently over the age of 18, at relevant times

of his employment with Carrnike, Green was a minor.

10. David Jefferys, a Wake Forest, North Carolina resident, is a former

employee of Carrnike Cinemas. Although currently over the age of 18, at relevant times

of his employment with Carrnike, Jefferys was a minor.

11. Matthew Cullingford, a Knightdale, North Carolina resident, is a former

employee of Carrnike Cinemas. Although currently over the age of 18, at relevant times

of his employment with Carrnike, Cullingford was a minor.

12. Chad Martin, a resident of Raleigh, North Carolina, is a former employee

of Carrnike Cinemas.

I3. Alvin Fairey, a resident of Raleigh, North Carolina, is a former employee

of Carrnike Cinemas.

14. These ten named Plaintiffs in whole or in part shall be collectively referred

to as "Named Plaintiffs."

3

FACTS 15. Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc. (hereinafter "Carmike") operates a movie theater located at 5501 Atlantic Springs Road, Raleigh, North Carolina, where all Named Plaintiffs worked. 16. Based upon information and belief, Antonio Hines is a known sexual offender, with two convictions for Taking Indecent Liberties with Minors for which he served an active sentence of incarceration. Hines' record as a sexual offender was published in the North Carolina Sex Offender & Public Protection Registry at http://sbi.jus.state.nc.usIDOJHAHT/SORlDefault.htm on the internet and other locations in the community. 17. Based upon information and belief, Johnnie Camp, General Manager of Carmike's Raleigh theater at times relevant to this suit, had a felony record. 18. Based upon information and belief, Josh Mitton, a manager at Carmike's Raleigh theater at times relevant to this suit, was the roommate of Antonio Hines. 19. On or about February 2003, Carmike hired Antonio Hines. 20. Based upon information and belief, Carmike hired Antonio Hines without investigating or inquiring whether Hines had a serious criminal record. 21. Based upon information and belief, Carmike hired Hines without providing Hines proper training regarding sexual harassment. 22. Within a short time of being hired, Carmike promoted Hines to the position of manager.
4

23. Based upon infonnation and belief, Cannike promoted Antonio Hines to the position of manager without investigating or inquiring whether Hines had a serious criminal record.
24. Cannike employs a number of minors to work in its theaters. 25. Upon infonnation and belief, as a manager, Hines had direct supervisory authority over all Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees. 26. Manager Antonio Hines had authority to train, interview, recommend for employment or tennination, counsel and control the working conditions of subordinate employees. 27. Upon infonnation and belief, Hines systematically used his managerial authority to aid his practice of sexually harassing young male employees at the theater. 28. As a concessions manager, Hines had a key to various "candy closets" in the theater where candy, concessions, drinks and supplies were stored. 29. Named Plaintiffs and other lower level subordinates did not have access to these locked closets and required the assistance and direction of a manager to retrieve items from the closet. 30. On multiple and daily occasions, Hines asked young male employees including but not limited to the Named Plaintiffs to assist him in the "candy closet." 31. Inside the "candy closet" or in other places in the theater out of sight of other employees and patrons, Antonio Hines subjected all Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees including Demetrius Wilson to the following acts of
5

physical sexual harassment - without authorization and in a sexual manner: touching, massaging, groping and fondling the nipples, buttocks, genital area, chest, back and shoulders of young male employees; blocking the subordinate's exit from the closet; kissing; hugging and propositioning subordinates for oral sex or attempting such acts.
32. On multiple and daily occasions, Antonio Hines would subject male subordinate employees, including all Named Plaintiffs, to persuasive, graphic and lurid verbal comments, suggestions, and propositions including but not limited to: "Whip it out so I can suck your dick." "You're going to be my boyfriend." "Have you thought about itT' "Have you ever sucked a dick?" " Let me see your friend." "I knew you would get hired because you're sexy." "Let me suck it." "Come here big dick." "You're sexy." "You know you want me to suck your dick." "Come here with your sexy self."
33. Antonio Hines used his managerial position to proposition sexual favors quid pro quo in exchange for favorable working conditions and increased hours.
34. When Named Plaintiffs rejected Hines' advances, Hines would or threaten to change their job duties adversely.
35. Antonio Hines sexually harassed Demetrius Wilson physically and verbally while he was a subordinate.
36. Wilson reported Hines behavior to Carmike managers Williams and Franklin, but Carmike failed to stop Hines' sexual harassment of Wilson.
37. Only after Wilson was also promoted to a management level position did Antonio Hines stop his sexual harassment of Wilson.
6

38. Although Hines stopped sexually harassing manager Wilson, Wilson and other Carmike managers knew that Antonio Hines continued to sexually harass other subordinate male employees.
39. While a manager Wilson complained to his supervisors at Carmike that several young boys would frequently enter the theater and movies for free as the guests of Manager Antonio Hines, a sexual offender, and that Hines was unfit and inadequately performed his job duties as a manager.
40. In or about April 2003, while in the "candy closet" alone, Hines placed both hands on the shoulders of former employee Isaiah Simmons and verbally made a statement regarding oral sex.
4 J. Simmons left the candy closet and immediately reported Hines' sexual advance to management the same day.
42. Simmons reported the incident to Carmike's General Manager Johnnie Camp.
43. On behalf of Carmike, General Manager Camp provided Simmons a form to report the incident.
44. Simmons completed the written form and documented Hines' behavior to Carmike.
45. Upon information and belief, no formal investigation of Simmons' complaint occurred although other members of management and employees including the Named Plaintiffs were told of Simmons' complaint.
7

46. After his initial complaint, Simmons was not interviewed, and Hines continued his employment in a managerial position.
47. In approximately May 2003, Simmons refused to serve a belligerent customer who had used profanity towards him, pursuant to the guidelines of Carmike's employment handbook.
48. Based on Antonio Hines' recommendation and investigation of the incident, Carmike terminated Simmons.
49. All Named Plaintiffs were continually sexually harassed and subjected to a sexually hostile work environment after Isaiah Simmons complained to Carmike about Hines' conduct, and Carmike terminated Isaiah Simmons.
50. Based on the retaliatory discharge of Isaiah Simmons and the lack of disciplinary action taken against Antonio Hines, Carmike employees were hesitant and fearful of making reports of sexual harassment.
51. While supervising Plaintiff Chad Martin and two other employees, Antonio Hines directed the two other employees to leave the area to perform other tasks. After the two employees left and Hines was alone was with Plaintiff Martin, Hines directed Martin to remove candy from the closet. Hines blocked the exit to closet, forcing Martin to come into physical contact with Hines' waist and midsection. Hines then attempted to massage Martin's shoulders. This physical contact with Hines was unwelcome.
8

52. Immediately after the unwelcome contact, Martin left the closet and reported the sexual advance to Carmike's managers Josh Mitton and Demetrius Wilson.
53. Both managers acknowledged Martin's report of sexual harassment but did not document the incident in writing and took no further action on Martin's report.
54. Based upon information and belief, Carmike again failed to investigate Hines' conduct pursuant to Martin's complaint to management. Martin was not interviewed. Hines was not disciplined and maintained his managerial position and authority.
55. While training Plaintiff Lewis, manager Antonio Hines called Lewis into an office to discuss working more hours. Hines stated that he would schedule Lewis for more hours. While alone in the office with Lewis, Antonio Hines kneeled on one knee. Hines then grabbed the back of Lewis' legs and thrust his head into Lewis' genital area. To defend himself, Lewis punched Hines. This physical contact with Hines was unwelcome.
56. Lewis reported this incident to management including manager Regina Williams.
57. Upon information and belief, Lewis' complaint was not documented in writing or properly investigated.
58. Carmike failed to take action against Hines. Antonio Hines maintained his managerial authority and continued to sexually harass, verbally and physically, Lewis and other male subordinates including the Named Plaintiffs.
9

59. After reporting the incident, Lewis suffered repeated embarrassment and ridicule in the workplace when co-employees gossiped about the sexual assault and asked Lewis about the assault.
60. Hines' sexual assault of Lewis in the office of Carmike was widely discussed and caused Lewis unbearable anxiety, depression and embarrassment.
61. Due to Carmike's lack of action taken against Antonio Hines and the humiliation of working in a sexually hostile work enviromnent where reports of sexual of harassment were not investigated or kept private from the knowledge of other employees, Plaintiff Lewis could not continue his employment and resigned.
62. Manager Regina Williams admitted to Judith Cullingford, Plaintiff Matthew Cullingford's mother, and to other Named Plaintiffs that she had verbally counseled Antonio Hines regarding his behavior.
63. Despite the reports to management made by Isaiah Simmons, Chad Martin, Leonard Lewis and other Named Plaintiffs, Antonio Hines continued to sexually harass Carmike employees, both physically and verbally, from the point that he was promoted to manager to October 2003.
64. Upon information and belief, Carmike's management had direct knowledge of Hines' conduct and failed to protect its employees from a sexually hostile work enviromnent.
65. In October 2003, Antonio Hines was arrested for Failure to Register as a Sex Offender.
10

66. After realizing that Cannike would never take any action to discipline Antonio Hines for the sexual assault that occurred in the office of the theater, Plaintiff Lewis filed a criminal assault charge against Antonio Hines.
67. In Wake County, North Carolina, Antonio Hines pled guilty to assaulting Leonard Lewis, was sentenced to an active tenn of incarceration but has since been released.
68. Numerous managers including but not limited Johnnie Camp, Regina Williams, Josh Mitton, Mr. Franklin and Demetrius Wilson were advised of or aware of manager Antonio Hines' persuasive and continual sexual harassment of Named Plaintiffs and other employees.
69. No action was taken by Cannike Cinemas, Inc. to discipline or stop the known conduct of Antonio Hines, a twice-convicted sexual offender.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT HIRING, PROMOTION & RETENTION 70. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-69 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein. 71. Defendant Cannike Cinemas, Inc. has a duty to the public and its employees to hire, promote and retain persons competent and fit to perfonn their job duties without violating rights of other employees. 72. Defendant Cannike has a duty to investigate the suitability and record of persons it hires.
11

73. Defendant Cannike has a duty to investigate the suitability and record of persons it promotes particularly when the promotion bestows authority over minor employees.
74. Defendant Cannike has a duty to investigate the suitability of a person that it retains as an employee when there has been evidence and reports of immoral, illegal and tortious conduct by an employee.
75. Defendant Cannike had a pattern and practice of hiring, promoting and retaining employees without even the most basic inquiry or investigation to determine whether the employee had been convicted of a felony.
76. Defendant Cannike often promoted individuals with serious felony records including Antonio Hines and the General Manager for the theater Johnnie Camp.
77. Cannike's promotion process did not include an examination or review of the employee's suitability to possess supervisory authority or the employee's criminal record prior to giving the employee managerial authority over employees, a large number of whom are minors.
78. Defendant Cannike received numerous complaints of Hines' sexual harassment of its employees and had actual notice or should have reasonably known that Antonio Hines was unfit to employ as a manager.
79. Defendant Cannike breached its duty to its employees and the public by hiring Antonio Hines without inquiring or investigating his criminal record.
12

80. Defendant Cannike breached its duty to the public and its employees by promoting Antonio Hines to a managerial position without inquiring or investigating his criminal record.
8!. Defendant Cannike breached its duty to the public and its employees by retaining Antonio Hines as a manager despite numerous reports that Hines sexually harassed, both physically and verbally, employees including Named Plaintiffs.
82. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Cannike's breach of its duties in hiring, promoting and retaining Antonio Hines, all Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees were subjected to physical and verbal sexual harassment in a sexually hostile environment.
83. All Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees suffered the humiliation, frustration, and anxiety of experiencing sexual harassment from a member of the same sex.
84. Named Plaintiffs also incurred medical expenses for physical and psychological treatment and sustained lost wages.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION NEGLIGENT TRAINING & SUPERVISION 85. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-84 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein.
13

86. Defendant Carmike has a legal duty to train its employees and managers on sexual harassment and the procedures for reporting and investigating instances of sexual harassment.
87. Defendant Carmike has a legal duty to supervise its employees and managers to ensure that its employees and mangers are not SUbjecting others to sexual harassment and are knowledgeable on the adequate procedures to report and investigate claims of sexual harassment.
88. Defendant Carmike breached its duty to adequately training and supervise its employees and managers on sexual harassment, the reporting of sexual harassment and investigation of sexual harassment complaints.
89. But for the breach of Defendant Carmike's duty in training and supervising Antonio Hines, Defendant Carmike's managers and other employees, all Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees were subjected to physical and verbal sexual harassment in a sexually hostile environment.
90. All Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees suffered the humiliation, frustration, and anxiety of experiencing sexual harassment from a member of the same sex.
91. Named Plaintiffs also incurred medical bills for physical and psychological treatment, and damages oflost wages.
14

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION ASSAULT
92. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-91 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein.
93. Carrnike's manager Antonio Hines used his managerial authority to systematically assault and touch, in a sexual manner, without authorization all Named Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees.
94. Although Carrnike and its managers had direct reports of Hines' assaults and Carrnike should have reasonably known of Hines' assaults on all Named Plaintiffs, Carrnike failed to repudiate the tortious acts of Antonio Hines or to terminate Antonio Hines' employment.
95. Antonio Hines pled guilty to and received an active sentence of incarceration for assaulting Intervener Leonard Lewis, Jr.
96. The assault of Lewis occurred in an office at Carrnike Cinemas while manager Antonio Hines was attempting to solicit oral sex from Lewis, quid pro quo, for extended working hours.
97. Other assaults on Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees occurred in the "candy closet," after Manager Antonio Hines had unlocked the closet and directed employees in the course of their job duties to retrieve items from the closet.
98. Alleged assaults occurred within the course and scope of Carmike employees' job duties.
15

99. Alleged assaults occurred in the furtherance ofCarmike's business. 100. Carmike's pattern of conduct, despite numerous reports of Hines' behavior to management, ratified Hines' conduct and assaults.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION SEXUAL HARASSMENT
101. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-100 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein.
lOZ. In violation of Title VII, Section ZOOOe-Z(a)(I), Carmike engaged in unlawful and tortious employment practices at its Raleigh theater and subjected all Named Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees to discrimination based on their sex by subjecting them to sexual harassment of Carmike manager Antonio Hines, creating a sexually hostile work environment.
103. Carmike's employment practices deprived Named Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees of equal employment opportunities and adversely affected their status as employees because of their sex, male.
104. Carmike's actions and omissions were done with malice, intentional or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Named Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees.
16

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION RETALIATION I CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE 105. The allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1-104 are incorporated by reference as if fully set out herein. 106. In addition to maintaining a sexually hostile work environment, Defendant Carmike has a pattern and practice of retaliating against employees that make reports of sexual harassment. 107. Carmike does not have or does not adequately enforce a policy to protect its employees from retaliation. 108. Carmike does not have or does not adequately train its employees and managers on a procedure for reporting acts of retaliation. 109. Named Plaintiffs engaged in a protected activity when they reported the sexual harassment of Antonio Hines. 110. Either after reporting to or discussing Hines' sexual harassment with management or filing a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC documenting Hines' sexual harassment, Carmike retaliated against Named Plaintiffs. 111. Carmike retaliated by reducing work hours, arbitrarily sending home, substantially changing the working conditions to perform less desirable work tasks, suspending, terminating, ignoring complaints and wrongfully disciplining said employeeNamed Plaintiffs.
17

112. In November 2003, Cannike's management asked Plaintiff Cullingford, a minor at the time, to provide a recorded statement to their attorney. Ms. Cullingford, Plaintiffs mother refused to allow her son to provide a statement without the guidance and representation of an attorney for the employee.
113. After refusing to provide a statement without the presence of an attorney, Carmike reduced the work hours and made later Cullingford's hours of employment.
114. After Named Plaintiffs filed complaints of Antonio Hines' sexual harassment at Cannike with the EEOC, manager Josh Mitton, a former roommate of Hines, retaliated against Named Plaintiffs.
115. Manager Josh Mitton gave Plaintiff Baxter three written reprimands on consecutive days.
116. Manager Josh Mitton terminated Plaintiff HoUey for job abandonment after Mitton advised Holley that he was approved for time off.
117. After manager Josh Mitton performed these acts of retaliation, Carmike awarded Josh Mitton with a promotion.
118. After his sexual harassment complaint was made, the count sheet of Plaintiff Green was altered to give the appearance that his inventory and money were not properly maintained.
119. After his sexual harassment complaint was made, Green advised management that another employee had hit him in the face with a broom, manager
18

Winstead told Green that he understood why she had hit Green in the face, and no action was taken against the other employee.
120. After employees Lindsey Widenhouse, Isaiah Simmons and Abdul-Wadud Jabal made complaints of sexual harassment, all were terminated.
121. In August 2004, Lindsey Widenhouse made a complaint to manager Theresa Bryant that she was being sexually harassed by manager Brenden Davis.
122. In September 2004, Lindsey Widenhouse was fired on the approximately or the same day that Jabal, who complained of the sexual harassment of Antonio Hines, was also terminated.
123. The pattern practice and purpose of said terminations was to intimidate other employees from making complaints of sexual harassment and to coerce employees with pending sexual harassment complaints before the EEOC to resign or quit.
124. After the terminations of co-employee(s) that made similar sexual harassment complaints and repeated acts of retaliation, Named Plaintiffs Holley, Green, Cullingford, Martin, Lewis, Smith and Fairey were constructively discharged and could no longer endure the intolerable, sexually hostile work environment and constant threat of retaliatory termination that were created by Carmike.
125. There is a causal link between the protected activities of Named Plaintiffs, and the aforementioned retaliatory acts of Defendant Carmike.
19

PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Named Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court:
I. Pennanently enjoin Cannike from maintaining a sexually hostile work environment, continuing other employment practices that discriminate on the basis of sex, and allowing retaliation against employees that report sexual harassment.
2. Pennanently enjoin Cannike Cinemas from employing Antonio Hines as an employee or manager.
3. Order Cannike to inquire whether applicants have been convicted of a felony offense.
4. Order Cannike to investigate the criminal records of all promotions to manager when the manager will be bestowed managerial authority over minors.
5. Award compensatory damages - based on past and future emotional pain, suffering, humiliation loss of civil rights and medical expenses - and punitive damages for Carmike's malicious and reckless conduct to make Named Plaintiffs whole, as detennined by a jury.
6. Award Named Plaintiffs costs and attorney fees of pursuing this action. This the 19'h day of April, 2005.
20

· .
BROWNE, FLEBOTTE, WILSON, HORN & WEBB, PLLC
JO~WWb
N.C. State Bar No. 22286 Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Intevenors and Applicant for Intevention P.O. Box 2247 Durham, North Carolina 27702 Telephone: (919) 688-7393 ext. 225 Facsimile: (919) 683-6323
c~f!!/»e1~/~
N.C. State Bar No. 28267 301 S. McDowell Street, Suite 1201 Charlotte, North Carolina 28204 Telephone: (704) 370-7771 Facsimile: (704) 370-7798
21

· ...

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day, the foregoing was served upon all parties in this action by mailing a copy thereof at the address indicated below by first class, postpaid United States mail, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This the 19th day of April, 2005.
BROWNE, FLEBOTTE, WILSON, HORN & WEBB, PLLC

N.C. State Bar No. 22286 Attorneys for Plaintiffs-Intevenors and Applicant for Intevention P.O. Box 2247 Durham, North Carolina 27702 Telephone: (919) 688-7393 ext. 225 Facsimile: (919) 683-6323

SERVED:
Lynette A. Barnes, Esq. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Charlotte District Office 129 W. Trade Street, Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28202
Zoe Mahood, Esq. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Raleigh Area Office 1309 Annapolis Drive Raleigh, NC 27608

Laura K. Johnson, Esq. Michael E. Ross, Esq. King & Spaulding LLP 191 Peachtree Street Atlanta, GA 30303-1763
Patricia T. Bartis, Esq. Parker, Poe, Adarns & Bernstein, L.L.P. P.O. Box 289 Raleigh, NC 27602-0389

22

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

E· 0 t~ ~,1;; ,f\-, I i-···~~--· 6~005 t l.C. SEP 2

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLI Ai

~~-~.:~- '::;~:>;Ig)~ rl-6~

Civil Action No. 5:04-CV-673-BO(1)

~-- - .""ox

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

)

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

)

Defendant.

)

)

)

SAMUEL BAXTER; JAMES

)

ROBINSON; LEONARD LEWIS, JR.;

)

TRAVOROUS GREEN; DAVID

)

JEFFREYS; MATTHEW

)

CULLINGFORD; CHAD MARTIN;

)

JORDAN HOLLEY; DEREK HODGE; )

JONATHAN SMITH; and ALVIN

)

FAIREY,

)

)

Plaintiffs-Intervenors,

)

)

v.

)

)

CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

)

Defendant.

)

)

)

CONSENT DECREE

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission") instituted this action, pursuant to Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.c. Section 2000e-5(f)(l) and (3) ("Title VII") and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981a, alleging that Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc. ("Defendant") discriminated against a group of young male employees at its theater located at

• I
5501 Atlantic Springs Road, Raleigh, North Carolina (the "Theater") by subjecting them to sexual harassment (a hostile work environment because of their sex) committed by a former lowlevel supervisor. Thereafter, Samuel Baxter, James Robinson, Leonard Lewis, Jr., Travorous Green, David Jeffreys, Matthew Cullingford, Chad Martin, Jordan Holley, Derek Hodge, Jonathan Smith, and Alvin Fairey ("Plaintiffs-Intervenors") intervened, through counsel, alleging violations of Title VII and state law. Defendant has denied and continues to deny the claims of the Commission and the Plaintiffs-Intervenors.
The Commission, Plaintiffs-Intervenors, and the Defendant hereby stipulate to jurisdiction of the Court over the parties and agree that the subject matter of this action is properly before the Court.
The parties have advised this Court that they desire to resolve all of the claims and allegations made in the Commission's Complaint and all of the claims and allegations made in the Plaintiffs-Intervenors' Complaints against Defendant without the burden, expense, and delay of further litigation. It is understood and agreed that this settlement is the compromise of disputed claims that Defendant has denied and continues to deny and is not an admission of liability or wrongdoing by Defendant.
It is therefore the finding of this Court, made on the pleadings and the record as a whole, that: (1) the Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this action; (2) the purpose and provisions of Title VII will be promoted and effectuated by the entry of this Consent Decree; and (3) this Decree resolves all matters in controversy between the parties, as provided in paragraphs 1 through 24 below.
2

I I
It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: 1. Defendant shall not discriminate against any person on the basis of sex or any other protected category within the meaning of Title VII. 2. Defendant shall not discriminate or retaliate against any person, within the meaning of Title VII, because of opposition to any practice made unlawful under Title VII or because of the filing of a charge, the giving of testimony or assistance, or the participation in any investigation, proceeding or hearing under that statute. 3. Defendant shall pay the total amount of seven hundred sixty-five thousand dollars ($ 765,000) (the "Total Settlement Amount") in resolution of the claims alleged in this matter, including all claims asserted by or on behalf of Samuel Baxter, Tim Collins, Matthew Cullingford, Alvin Fairey, Travorous Green, Derek Hodge, Jordan Holley, David Jeffreys, Leonard Lewis, Jr., Gilbert Lorfils, Chad Martin, James Robinson, Cedric Sanders and Jonathan Smith ("the Individual Claimants") and all other claims that were or could have been asserted by the Commission against Defendant: (a) based on or arising under EEOC Charge Nos. 141-2004-00832, 141-2004-00840, 141-2004-00855,141-2004-00889, 141-2004-01192, 141-2004-01495, and/or 141-2004-01581 ("the EEOC Charges"); or (b) based on or arising out of any sexually harassing conduct (toward male employees who worked at the Theater) that the former employee of Defendant who was accused of sexual harassment in this case allegedly engaged in during his 2003 employment at the Theater. The Total Settlement Amount shall be divided among the Individual Claimants in the manner that has been agreed upon by Defendant, the Individual Claimants, and their counsel.
3

I I
4. Payment of the Total Settlement Amount is expressly conditioned upon Defendant's Atlanta Counsel's receipt, from each Individual Claimant, of a fully executed Confidential General Waiver and Release of Claims ("General Release") that is acceptable to Defendant. Defendant agrees to pay the sum of two hundred and fifty dollars ($ 250) each for Individual Claimants Timothy Collins, Gilbert Lorfils and Cedric Sanders, who are not parties in this action, to retain private counsel for the sale purpose of reviewing Defendant's General Release and advising Messrs. Collins, Lorfils and Sanders concerning same. Payment shall be made directly to the attorney(s) chosen and designated by said Individual Claimants.
5. Defendant shall pay each Individual Claimant his agreed-upon share of the Total Settlement Amount by mailing to the Individual Claimant's attorney (or directly to Messrs. Collins, Lorfils and Sanders at their respective addresses, to be provided by the Commission), a check made payable to the Individual Claimant and his attorney (if any), within fifteen (15) days after (a) the Court approves and enters this Consent Decree and (b) Defendant's Atlanta Counsel receives fully executed General Releases from all of the Individual Claimants, whichever occurs later. Within ten (10) days after each such check is sent, Defendant shall mail to Lynette A. Barnes, Acting Regional Attorney, at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 129 W. Trade Street, Suite 400, Charlotte N.C., 28202, a copy of the check and proof of its mailing.
6. In addition to the payment of the sums referenced in paragraphs 3 and 4 above, Defendant agrees to pay all fees and expenses of mediator Jonathan Harkavy that are associated with the mediation of this lawsuit, which occurred on July 28-29, 2005.
4

I I
7. Within ten (10) days after the entry of this Decree by the Court, Defendant shall remove from each Individual Claimant's personnel file any and all documents, entries, or references of any kind, that Defendant believes in good faith relate to the facts and circumstances which led to the filing of the EEOC Charges and the related events that occurred thereafter. Within fifteen (15) days after the entry of this Decree by the Court, Defendant shall report compliance with this provision to the EEOC.
8. Defendant agrees to provide each Individual Claimant with a neutral letter of reference stating only his dates of employment, pay rate, and job position at the Theater.
9. Defendant has a written sexual harassment policy (the "Policy") which is contained in its Employee Handbook. During the term of this Decree, Defendant shall provide the Policy to all new employees hired at its District 4 theaters, and shall review the Policy with them at or about the time of hire.
10. During the term of this Decree, Defendant shall post a summary of the Policy described in paragraph 9, supra, at its District 4 theaters, in a place where it is visible to employees. The Policy summary shall be in the form currently used by Defendant, that being an llx 17 inch laminated poster. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Consent Decree, Defendant shall revise the Policy summary to change the following language as indicated: (a) current language to be deleted - "Any employee who believes that he or she has been harassed at work in violation of this policy by any person, including a manager, supervisor, co-worker, patron, or other visitor to the workplace, is required to call Toll Free [toll free number];" (b) language to be substitutedfor the deleted language - "If you experience any job-related
5

• I
harassment of any sort or you believe you have been treated in an unlawful, discriminatory manner, promptly report the incident by calling toll-free at [toll free number]." Defendant shall report to the EEOC that it has revised the Policy summary as required by this paragraph within forty five (45) days of the entry of this Decree. If during the term of this Decree, the Policy summary becomes defaced or unreadable, Defendant will replace it by posting another copy of the Policy summary.
11. During the term of this Decree, Defendant shall provide an annual training program to all managers and supervisors who work at its District 4 theaters. Each training program shall include an explanation of the requirements of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and its prohibition against sexual harassment and retaliation in the workplace. Each training program shall also include an explanation of the Policy referenced in paragraph 9 above, and an explanation of the rights and responsibilities of employees, supervisors and managers under the Policy.
The first training program shall be completed within ninety (90) days after entry of the Decree by the Court. Each subsequent training program shall be conducted at approximately one year intervals. At least fifteen (15) days prior to each program, Defendant shall provide the Commission with an agenda for the training program. Within ten (10) days after completion of each training program, Defendant shall certify to the Commission the specific training which was undertaken and shall provide the Commission with a roster of all managers and supervisors in attendance.
12. During the term of this Decree, Defendant shall provide all new employees hired at its District 4 theaters with training that will include an explanation of the requirements of
6

I I
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as to the prohibition against sexual harassment and retaliation), and the Policy referenced in paragraph 9 above. Such training shall begin no later than one hundred twenty (120) days after this Decree is entered, and shall thereafter be provided to all new hires at or about the time of hire. No later than one hundred twenty (120) days after this Decree is entered, Defendant shall provide all then-current employees of its District 4 theaters with the same training program that will be provided to new hires. Within ten (10) days after completion of the training program for then-current employees referenced in this paragraph, Defendant shall certify to the Commission the specific training that was undertaken and shall provide the Commission with a roster of all employees in attendance.
13. Beginning within thirty (30) days after the entry of this Decree by the Court, and continuing throughout the term of this Decree, Defendant shall conspicuously post the attached Employee Notice, marked Exhibit A, hereby made a part of this Decree, in a place where it is visible to employees at its District 4 theaters. If the Notice becomes defaced or unreadable, Defendant shall replace it by posting another copy of the Notice. Within forty-five (45) days after the Consent Decree is entered, Defendant will notify the Commission that the Employee Notice has been posted in all its District 4 theaters.
14. During the term of this Consent Decree, Defendant shall provide the Commission with reports at six (6) month intervals, with the first being due four (4) months after entry of this Decree by the Court. The reports will include the following information: (a) the identities of all employees who have complained of sexual harassment at any of its District 4 theaters during the preceding six months, including by way of identification each such employee's name, address, telephone number, sex, position, and social security number; (b) a detailed
7

• I
statement of the employee's complaint; (c) the identity of the alleged harasser, including by way of identification the alleged harasser's name, address, telephone number, sex, position, and social security number; and (d) what action was taken in response to the employee's complaint. Defendant shall submit the reports to the Commission four (4) months after the date of entry of this Consent Decree and every six (6) months thereafter during the term of this Decree. If Defendant has no activity to report, Defendant shall submit a report indicating that it has had no employees complain about sexual harassment at the subject theaters within the relevant period.
IS. The Commission may review compliance with this Decree. As part of such review, the Commission may inspect the District 4 theaters to check compliance with the posting requirements in paragraphs 10 and 13 above without prior notice to Defendant. The Commission may also interview employees and examine and copy documents, subject to and without waiving Defendant's rights to protect its privileged and confidential information. The Commission will provide Defendant with one business day written notice prior to appearing at a District 4 theater for the purpose of conducting employee interviews and/or reviewing documents. The Commission further agrees that it will conduct such interviews and/or document reviews during Defendant's normal business hours for the theater at which the compliance review will be conducted. For purposes of this paragraph, "one business day notice" means 24 hours if the period does not include weekends (e.g., Monday at 3:00 p.m. until Tuesday at 3:00 p.m.) or 72 hours if the period includes weekends (i.e., Friday at 3:00 p.m. until Monday at 3:00 p.m.).
8

• I
16. If at any time during the term of this Decree, the Commission believes that Defendant is in violation of the Decree, the Commission shall give written notice of the alleged violation to Defendant. Defendant shall have twenty (20) days in which to investigate and respond to the allegations. Thereafter, the parties shall then have a period of twenty (20) days (or such additional period as may be agreed upon by them) in which to engage in negotiation and conciliation regarding such allegations before the Commission exercises any remedy provided by law.
17. The term of this Decree shall be for three (3) years from its entry by the Court. 18. All reports or other documents sent to the Commission by Defendant pursuant to this Decree shall be sent to: Lynette A. Bames, Acting Regional Attorney, at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 129 W. Trade Street, Suite 400, Charlotte N.C., 28202. 19. All communications sent by the Commission to Defendant pursuant to this Decree shall be sent to: Carmike's Vice President GM Theatre Operations (Gary Krannacker) at gkrannac@carmike.com or (706) 653-5279 (fax), unless and until an authorized Carmike representative designates different contact information for Defendant. Under no circumstances shall the Commission be required to send notices to more than one (1) Carmike representative under the provisions of this Consent Decree. 20. Each party shall bear his/its own attorneys' fees that he/it incurred in connection with this case and/or in connection with any of the EEOC Charges. Except as expressly provided in paragraph 6 of this Decree, each party shall bear hislits own costs that he/it incurred in connection with this case and/or in connection with any of the EEOC Charges.
9

I I
21. This Court shall retain jurisdiction of this cause for purposes of monitoring compliance with this Decree and entry of such further orders as may be necessary or appropriate.
22. Sam and Lenora Baxter Dunston and Tanette Brown are hereby removed as guardians ad litem of Samuel Baxter and James Robinson, respectively, who are no longer minors. Samuel Baxter and James Robinson are hereby substituted for their former guardians ad litem as parties in this case.
23. The term "District 4 theaters" as used in this Consent Decree refers to Defendant's thirteen theaters located at the addresses listed on Exhibit B hereto.
24. Within five (5) days after the Court enters this Decree, the Commission and Plaintiffs-Intervenors shall file a Stipulation of Dismissal with Prejudice of their claims in this case, in the form of attached Exhibit C.
udge, U.S. District Court Eastern District of North Caro
10

I I
The parties jointly request that the Court approve and enter the Consent Decree: EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff ERIC S. DREmAND General Counsel JAMES L.LEE Deputy General Counsel GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS
eneral Counsel
Lynett A. Barnes Actin Regional Attorney 129 West Trade Street, Suite 400 Charlotte, N.C. 28202 Tel: (704) 344-6878
~G. MCfoo{ {) Senior Trial Attorney 1309 Annapolis Drive Raleigh, N.C. 27608 Tel: (919) 856-4080
(Signatures continued on the following pages)
11

• I
SAM & LENORA BAXTER DUNSTON; SAMUEL BAXTER; LEONARD LEWIS, JR.; DAVID JEFFREYS; MATTHEW CULLINGFORD; JORDAN HOLLEY; DEREK HODGE; and ALVIN FAIREY, Plaintiffs-Intervenors
Browne, Flebotte, Wilson & Webb, PLLC 2525 Meridian Prkwy, Suite 300 P.O. Box 2247 Durham, N.C. 27702 Tel: (919) 688-7393
TANETTE BROWN; JAMES ROBINSON; TRAVOROUS GREEN; CHAD MARTIN; and JONATHAN SMITH; Plaintiffs-Intervenors
; y - ~~?~
cffiii:IesAli Everage
The Everage Law Firm, PLLC P.O. Box 5628 2128 Commonwealth Avenue Charlotte, N.C. 28299 Tel: (704) 377-9157
(Signatures continued on the following page)
12

• I
CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC., Defendant
'Jit l J i A
Michael Eric Ross Laura K. Johnson King & Spalding LLP 191 Peachtree Street Atlanta GA 30303-1763 Tel: (404) 572-4876
~Q~ 7Xk~~
Patricia T. Bartis Parker, Poe, Adams & Bernstein L.L.P. 150 Fayetteville Street Mall, Suite 1400 P.O. Box 389 Raleigh, NC 27602-0389 Tel: (919) 828-0564 Local Counsel
(End ofdocument)
13

• I

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Civil Action No. 5:04-CV-673-BO(1)

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
v.
CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

)

)

)

)

EEOC NOTICE

)

)

)

Defendant.

1. This Notice is posted by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), pursuant to a settlement between the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Carmike Cinemas, Inc., in a case alleging discrimination based on sex. Specifically, the EEOC alleged that Cannike Cinemas, Inc. subjected a group of young men at its theater located at 5501 Atlantic Springs Road, Raleigh, North Carolina to sexual harassment by a former employee, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Cannike Cinemas, Inc. has denied and continues to deny these claims but has agreed to this settlement to avoid further litigation and to buy its peace. As part of the settlement, Cannike Cinemas, Inc. agreed to make certain payments to the allegedly aggrieved claimants and to take other action set out in the Consent Decree resolving this matter.
2. Federal law requires that employers not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of the individual's race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age (40 or older) or disability. Title VII specifically prohibits discrimination based on sex, including sexual harassment.
3. Cannike Cinemas, Inc. will comply with such federal law in all respects. Furthermore, Carmike Cinemas, Inc. will not take any actions against employees in violation of federal law because they have exercised their rights, reported an alleged violation under the law or given testimony, assistance or participation in any investigation, proceeding or hearing conducted by the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE UNTIL: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, 2008.
EXHIDIT A (page 1 of 2)

• I
An employee has the right, and is encouraged to exercise that right, to report allegations of employment discrimination in the workplace. An employee may contact their local U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission field office for the purpose of filing a charge of employment discrimination. To locate the nearest field office, contact:
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20507 TEL: 1-800-669-4000 TTY: 1-800-669-6820
This Notice will remain posted for three (3) years by agreement with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE UNTIL: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,2008.
EXHIDIT A (page 2 of 2) 2

• I
CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC., DISTRICT 4 THEATERS
1807 MLK Blvd. Durham, NC 22707
3101 Chaswell Drive Goldsboro, NC 27530
1685 E. Fire Tower Road Greenville, NC 27834
9525 Chapel Hills Road Morrisville, NC 27560
5501 Atlantic Springs Road Raleigh, NC 27616
600 Blueridge Road Raleigh, NC 27606
1109 West 15th Street Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889
1005 Garden Blvd. Charlottesville, VA 22091
801 Lakeside Drive Lynchburg, VA 24506
F315 Rive Ridge Mall 3405 Candlers Mt. Road Lynchburg, VA 24502
1100 Alverser Drive Midlothian, VA 23113
4494 Electric Road Roanoke, VA 24014
1700 Apperson Drive Salem, VA 24153
EXHffiITB

• I

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

)

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

)

Defendant.

)

)

)

SAMUEL BAXTER; JAMES ROBINSON;

)

LEONARD LEWIS, JR.; TRAVOROUS GREEN;)

DAVID JEFFREYS; MATTHEW

)

CULLINGFORD; CHAD MARTIN; JORDAN )

HOLLEY; DEREK HODGE; JONATHAN

)

SMITH; and ALVIN FAIREY,

)

)

Plaintiffs-Intervenors, )

v.

)

)

CARMIKE CINEMAS, INC.,

)

)

Defendant.

)

)

CASE NO. 5:04-CV-673-BO (1)

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

COME NOW Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Plaintiffs-

Intervenors, through their respective undersigned counsel, and dismiss with prejudice all claims

in the above-styled case, pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(ii). Each party will bear itslhis own

attorneys' fees in connection with the above-styled action. Each party will bear itslhis own

costs in connection with the above-styled action, except as specifically provided in the Consent

Decree entered in this matter.

EXHffiIT C (page 1 of2)

• I

In accordance with the Consent Decree that has been entered in this action, this Court shall retain jurisdiction of this cause for purposes of monitoring compliance with this Decree and entry of such further orders as may be necessary or appropriate.
Respectfully submitted this _ _ day of August, 2005.

LYNETTE A. BARNES Acting Regional Attorney N.C. State Bar No. 19732
ZOE G. MAHOOD Senior Trial Attorney N.C. State Bar No. 21722
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1309 Annapolis Drive Raleigh, N.C. 27608 (919) 856-4080
ATTORNEYS FORPLAINTITFEEOC

PATRICIA T. BARTIS N.C. State Bar No. 21212
PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BERNSTEIN, LLP 150 Fayetteville Street Mall, Suite 1400 P.O. Box 389 Raleigh, NC 27602-0389 (919) 828-0564
MICHAEL ERIC ROSS LAURA K. JOHNSON
KING & SPALDING LLP 191 Peachtree Street Atlanta GA 30303-1763 (404) 572-3528
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

JOY RHYNE WEBB N.C. State Bar No. 22286

CHARLES EVERAGE N.C. State Bar No. 28267

BROWN FLEBOTTE WILSON

THE EVERAGE LAW FIRM, PLLC

HORN & WEBB, PLLC

Post Office Box 5628

2525 Meridian Parkway Suite 300

Charlotte, NC 28299

P.O. Box 2247

(704) 377.9157

Durham, N.C. 27702

(919) 688-7393

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF-

INTERVENORS TRAVOROUS GREEN,

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTITFS-

CHAD MARTIN, JONATHAN SMITH AND

INTERVENORS SAMUEL BAXTER,

JAMES ROBINSON

MATTHEW CULLINGFORD, ALVIN

FAIREY, DEREK HODGE, JORDAN

HOLLEY, DAVID JEFFREYS, AND

LEONARD LEWIS, JR.

EXHIBIT C (page 2 of2)

-2-

 
 CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...

CLOSED, USMJ_Dever
U.S. District Court EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA (Western Division)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 5:04-cv-00673-BO

EEOC v. Carmike Cinemas, Inc Assigned to: Judge Terrence W. Boyle Demand: $0 Cause: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Intervenor Plaintiff Willie Holley as Guardian of minor J. HOLLEY TERMINATED: 03/08/2005

Date Filed: 09/16/2004 Date Terminated: 09/28/2005 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff
represented by Lynette A. Barnes EEOC/ Charlotte District Officed 129 West Trade St. Suite 400 Charlotte, NC 28202-5306 704-344-6878 Fax: 704-344-6780 Email: lynette.barnes@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Zoe G. Mahood E.E.O.C. 1309 Annapolis Dr. Raleigh, NC 27608 919-856-4080 Fax: 919-856-4156 Email: zoe.mahood@EEOC.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage The Everage Law Firm, PLLC 1800 Camden Rd., Suite 104 Charlotte, NC 28203 704-377-9157 Fax: 704-377-9160 Email: cae@everagelaw.com TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb Merritt, Flebotte, Wilson, Webb & Caruso,

1 of 9

6/12/2007 1:05 PM

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report
Intervenor Plaintiff Paula Holley as Guardian of minor J. HOLLEY TERMINATED: 03/08/2005
Intervenor Plaintiff Lenora Baxter Dunston as Guardian of minor S. BAXTER
Intervenor Plaintiff Sam Dunston as Guardian of minor S. BAXTER
Intervenor Plaintiff Eva Hodge as Guardian of minor D. HODGE TERMINATED: 03/08/2005
2 of 9

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...
PLLC P. O. Box 2247 Durham, NC 27702 919-688-7393 Fax: 919-683-6323 Email: jwebb@carotennlaw.com TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005
6/12/2007 1:05 PM

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report
Intervenor Plaintiff Derek Hodge as Guardian of minor D. HODGE TERMINATED: 03/08/2005
Intervenor Plaintiff Jacqueline (nmi) Smith as Guardian of minor J. SMITH TERMINATED: 03/08/2005
Intervenor Plaintiff Jonathan Smith, Sr. as Guardian of minor J. SMITH TERMINATED: 03/08/2005
Intervenor Plaintiff
3 of 9

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...
LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2005 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
6/12/2007 1:05 PM

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report
Tanette Brown as Guardian of minor J. ROBINSON
Intervenor Plaintiff Leonard Lewis, Jr.
Intervenor Plaintiff Tarvorous Green
Intervenor Plaintiff David Jeffreys
Intervenor Plaintiff Matthew Cullingford
4 of 9

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
6/12/2007 1:05 PM

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report
Intervenor Plaintiff Chad Martin
Intervenor Plaintiff Jordan Holley
Intervenor Plaintiff Jonathan Smith
Intervenor Plaintiff Derek Hodge
5 of 9

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
6/12/2007 1:05 PM

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...

V. Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc.
Intervenor Defendant Carmike Cinemas, Inc.
Intervenor Plaintiff Alvin Fairey

represented by Patricia T. Bartis Parker, Poe, Adams & Bernstein, LLP 150 Fayetteville Street, Suite 1400 Raleigh, NC 27602 919-890-4161 Fax: 919-835-4555 Email: pattibartis@parkerpoe.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Patricia T. Bartis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Charles Ali Everage (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Joy Rhyne Webb (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/16/2004 09/16/2004 09/16/2004 10/01/2004 11/04/2004

#

Docket Text

1 Complaint filed - USA Plaintiff: Sexual Harrassment under the Civil Rights Act. JURY DEMAND. (js) (Entered: 09/21/2004)
2 Waiver of Service Returned Executed as to Carmike Cinemas, Inc 9/16/04 Answer due on 11/15/04 for Carmike Cinemas, Inc (js) (Entered: 09/21/2004)
(js) (Entered: 09/21/2004)
3 Acknowledgement of service as to Carmike Cinemas, Inc (js) (Entered: 10/02/2004)
4 Motion by Willie Holley, Paula Holley, Lenora Baxter Dunston, Sam Dunston, Eva Hodge, Derek Hodge, Jacqueline (nmi) Smith, Jonathan Smith Sr., Tanette Brown, Leonard Lewis Jr., Tarvorous Green, David Jeffreys, Matthew Cullingford, Chad Martin to intervene as plaintiffs (js) (Entered: 11/29/2004)

6 of 9

6/12/2007 1:05 PM

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...

11/04/2004
11/04/2004 11/15/2004 11/15/2004 11/29/2004 11/29/2004 11/29/2004 12/09/2004 12/14/2004 12/15/2004 01/14/2005 01/14/2005 01/14/2005 01/14/2005 02/07/2005

5 Memorandum by Willie Holley, Paula Holley, Lenora Baxter Dunston, Sam Dunston, Eva Hodge, Derek Hodge, Jacqueline (nmi) Smith, Jonathan Smith Sr., Tanette Brown, Leonard Lewis Jr., Tarvorous Green, David Jeffreys, Matthew Cullingford, Chad Martin in support of [4-1] motion to intervene as plaintiffs (js) (Entered: 11/29/2004)
6 Motion by Willie Holley, Paula Holley, Lenora Baxter Dunston, Sam Dunston, Eva Hodge, Derek Hodge, Jacqueline (nmi) Smith, Jonathan Smith Sr., Tanette Brown for appointment of guardians ad litem (js) (Entered: 11/29/2004)
7 Notice of attorney appearance for Carmike Cinemas, Inc by Patricia T. Bartis (js) (Entered: 11/29/2004)
8 Answer to Complaint by Carmike Cinemas, Inc (js) (Entered: 11/29/2004)
9 Order granting [6-1] motion for appointment of guardians ad litem signed by Dever, MJ. served. (js) (Entered: 11/29/2004)
10 Order granting [4-1] motion to intervene as plaintiffs. The complaint in intervention is due by 12/13/04. signed by Dever, MJ. served. (js) (Entered: 11/29/2004)
11 Response by Carmike Cinemas, Inc to [6-1] motion for appointment of guardians ad litem, [4-1] motion to intervene as plaintiffs. cy. to MJ Dever. (js) (Entered: 12/03/2004)
12 Intervenor's complaint by Plaintiff Internvenors against Carmike Cinemas, Inc. JURY DEMAND. (js) Modified on 12/10/2004 (Entered: 12/10/2004)
13 Motion by Carmike Cinemas, Inc to extend time to respond to intervenor complaint . w/consent. (js) (Entered: 12/14/2004)
14 Order granting [13-1] motion to extend time to respond to intervenor complaint, reset answer due for 1/14/05 for Carmike Cinemas, Inc signed by Brooks, Acting Clerk. served. (js) (Entered: 12/15/2004)
15 Answer by Carmike Cinemas, Inc to [12-1] intervenor complaint (js) (Entered: 01/15/2005)
16 Motion by Carmike Cinemas, Inc to terminate guardianships ad litem of Jacqueline and Jonathan Smith, Willie and Paula Holley, and Eva and Derek Hodge (js) (Entered: 01/15/2005)
17 Memorandum by Carmike Cinemas, Inc in support of [16-1] motion to terminate guardianships ad litem of Jacqueline and Jonathan Smith, Willie and Paula Holley, and Eva and Derek Hodge (js) (Entered: 01/15/2005)
18 Request for Discovery Plan: Discovery Plan due by 3/4/05 (js) (Entered: 01/15/2005)
19 Response by Willie Holley, Paula Holley, Lenora Baxter Dunston, Sam Dunston, Eva Hodge, Derek Hodge, Jacqueline (nmi) Smith, Jonathan Smith Sr., Tanette Brown, Leonard Lewis Jr., Tarvorous Green, David Jeffreys, Matthew Cullingford, Chad Martin to [16-1] motion to terminate guardianships ad litem of Jacqueline and Jonathan Smith, Willie and Paula Holley, and Eva and Derek Hodge (js) (Entered: 02/10/2005)

7 of 9

6/12/2007 1:05 PM

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...

02/23/2005 02/24/2005
02/28/2005
03/08/2005
03/08/2005 03/09/2005 03/09/2005 03/25/2005 03/27/2005 03/28/2005 04/12/2005 04/15/2005 04/19/2005 05/06/2005 05/27/2005

20 Reply by Carmike Cinemas, Inc to response to [16-1] motion to terminate guardianships ad litem of Jacqueline and Jonathan Smith, Willie and Paula Holley, and Eva and Derek Hodge (js) (Entered: 02/28/2005)
21 Discovery Plan filed by EEOC, Carmike Cinemas, Inc, Willie Holley, Paula Holley, Lenora Baxter Dunston, Sam Dunston, Eva Hodge, Derek Hodge, Jacqueline (nmi) Smith, Jonathan Smith Sr., Tanette Brown, Leonard Lewis Jr., Tarvorous Green, David Jeffreys, Matthew Cullingford, Chad Martin (js) (Entered: 02/28/2005)
Motion(s) referred: referred [16-1] motion to terminate guardianships ad litem of Jacqueline and Jonathan Smith, Willie and Paula Holley, and Eva and Derek Hodge and discovery plan submitted to USMJ James C. Dever III. (js) (Entered: 02/28/2005)
22 Order granting [16-1] motion to terminate guardianships ad litem of Jacqueline and Jonathan Smith, Willie and Paula Holley, and Eva and Derek Hodge. JORDAN HOLLEY, JONATHAN SMITH and DEREK HODGE shall be substituted for removed guardians. signed by Dever, MJ. served. (js) (Entered: 03/08/2005)
23 Order on Scheduling by Magistrate Judge Dever setting Discovery cutoff 1/31/06 Deadline for filing of all motions 3/15/06. served. (js) (Entered: 03/08/2005)
24 Motion to intervene as plaintiff by Alvin Fairey . w/attach. UNSIGNED PROPOSED AMENDED COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION. (js) Modified on 03/12/2005 (Entered: 03/12/2005)
25 Memorandum by Alvin Fairey in support of [24-1] motion to intervene as plaintiff by Alvin Fairey (js) (Entered: 03/12/2005)
Letter From: Parker Poe Re: not filing a response to motion to intervene. (js) (Entered: 03/27/2005)
Motion(s) referred: referred [24-1] motion to intervene as plaintiff by Alvin Fairey to USMJ James C. Dever III. (js) (Entered: 03/27/2005)
26 Order granting [24-1] motion to intervene as plaintiff by Alvin Fairey signed by Dever, MJ. served. (js) (Entered: 03/29/2005)
Received proposed consent protective order. cy to USMJ Dever (iw) (Entered: 04/12/2005)
27 Order, for protective order signed by Dever, MJ. served. (js) (Entered: 04/16/2005)
28 Intervenor's complaint by Alvin Fairey against Carmike Cinemas, Inc. JURY DEMAND. (js) (Entered: 04/20/2005)
29 Answer to Complaint of Alvin Fairey by Carmike Cinemas, Inc (js) (Entered: 05/06/2005)
30 Motion by Carmike Cinemas, Inc for judgment on the pleadings as to the Title VII claims of Alvin Fairey (js) (Entered: 05/30/2005)

8 of 9

6/12/2007 1:05 PM

CM/ECF - NCED - Docket Report

https://ecf.nced.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?803772019865903-L_3...

05/27/2005
06/20/2005 06/20/2005 07/08/2005 08/02/2005 08/10/2005 09/26/2005
09/28/2005 09/28/2005 11/04/2005

31 Memorandum by Carmike Cinemas, Inc in support of [30-1] motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the Title VII claims of Alvin Fairey (js) (Entered: 05/30/2005)
32 Memorandum by Alvin Fairey in opposition to [30-1] motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the Title VII claims of Alvin Fairey (iw) (Entered: 06/21/2005)
33 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [30-1] motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the Title VII claims of Alvin Fairey (iw) (Entered: 06/22/2005)
34 Reply by Carmike Cinemas, Inc to response to [30-1] motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the Title VII claims of Alvin Fairey (js) (Entered: 07/16/2005)
Informed by counsel that case has settled--letter to Judge Boyle from mediator. left side of file (iw) (Entered: 08/22/2005)
Motion(s) submitted: [30-1] motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the Title VII claims of Alvin Fairey submitted to J. Boyle (iw) (Entered: 08/10/2005)
35 Consent Decree - w/in 5 days of this decree the commission and the pltf. intervenors shall file a stipulation of dismissal w/prejudice. signed by Boyle, J. served. (js) (Entered: 09/26/2005)
36 Stipulation of dismissal of all claims w/prejudice (bb) (Entered: 09/29/2005)
Case closed non-perm (bb) (Entered: 09/29/2005)
Receipt: $ 2.00, receipt number 50692 for copies at Wilmington Office. (Deputy Clerk, BRB) (Entered: 11/09/2005)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/12/2007 14:06:56

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 5

Cost:

eeoc 5:04-cv-00673-BO 0.40

9 of 9

6/12/2007 1:05 PM

 
 Carmike Cinemas to Pay $765,000 to Settle Rare Case Of Male-on-male...

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/9-27-05.html

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 27, 2005

CONTACT: TTY:

Lynette A. Barnes Acting Regional Attorney (704) 344-6878 (704) 344-6684

CARMIKE CINEMAS TO PAY $765,000 TO SETTLE RARE CASE OF MALE-ON-MALE TEEN HARASSMENT
EEOC Says Male Supervisor Groped Young Men, Made Advances and Requested Sexual Favors
RALEIGH, N.C. – Carmike Cinemas, Inc. (Carmike), a large movie theater chain operating 312 theaters in 36 states, will pay $765,000 to resolve an employment discrimination lawsuit by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charging that a group of young men were sexually harassed by their male supervisor, a convicted sex offender, at Carmike’s theater located at 5501 Atlantic Springs Road in Raleigh.
EEOC filed the suit one year ago asserting that 14 young men working in various positions at Carmike were subjected to unwelcome sexual touching, egregious sexual comments, sexual advances and requests for sexual favors from their male supervisor between February and October 2003. The suit was filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, Western Division (EEOC et. al v. Carmike Cinemas, Inc.; Civil Action No. 5:04-CV-673-BO(1), after the EEOC first attempted to reach a voluntary pre-litigation settlement.
"Employers must heighten their awareness to harassment of teenage workers – one of the most vulnerable segments of the labor force – and actively take steps to prevent it," said Reuben Daniels, Jr., Director of the EEOC’s Charlotte District Office. "This settlement sends a message to all employers that if you hire teens, you must be especially vigilant to protect them from discrimination on the job."
The monetary payment of more than three quarters of a million dollars is the largest damages amount in an EEOC teen harassment lawsuit since the agency began tracking the issue in 2001. In addition to the monetary payout, the court-filed consent decree settling the suit requires Carmike to take the following other actions at its theaters in North Carolina and Virginia that comprise Carmike’s “District 4” (including the Atlantic Springs Road theater):
Distribute its sexual harassment policy to all new hires in District 4;
Post a revised summary of its sexual harassment policy at those same theaters;
Provide annual training concerning sexual harassment and unlawful retaliation to all its managers, supervisors and new hires within District 4; and
Carmike must post an Employee Notice at its District 4 theaters concerning the lawsuit and employees’ rights under federal anti-discrimination laws.
Lynette A. Barnes, EEOC’s Acting Regional Attorney in Charlotte, said: "Although we are filing more litigation involving teen harassment, this case is unique because we rarely receive reports of men sexually harassing other men – especially when the victim is a teenager."
Barnes added: "The EEOC applauds these young men for standing up and asserting their rights. For a teenager to openly oppose sexual harassment by an older male supervisor takes a great deal of strength and courage. Hopefully, this settlement will encourage other teens to come forward if they experience discrimination at work."
In September 2004, the EEOC launched its national Youth@Work initiative. Youth@Work is a comprehensive outreach and education campaign designed to inform teens about their employment rights and responsibilities and to help employers create positive first work experiences for young adults. Further information about the Youth@Work campaign is available on the agency’s web site at www.eeoc.gov. Specific EEOC-related information for teens is available on the Youth@Work web site at www.youth.eeoc.gov.
The EEOC enforces Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act; the Equal Pay Act; prohibitions against discrimination affecting individuals with disabilities in the federal sector; sections of the Civil Rights Act of 1991; and Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act which prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in the private sector and state an d local governments.

1 of 2

6/12/2007 1:08 PM

Carmike Cinemas to Pay $765,000 to Settle Rare Case Of Male-on-male... This page was last modified on September 27, 2005. Return to Home Page

http://www.eeoc.gov/press/9-27-05.html

2 of 2

6/12/2007 1:08 PM

 
 EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - September 2005

http://www.eeoc.gov/litigation/settlements/settlement09-05.html

EEOC v. Carmike Cinemas, Inc. No. 5:04-CV-673-BO(1) (E.D.N.C. Sept. 26, 2005)
The Charlotte District Office alleged that Carmike Cinemas, operator of a chain of movie theaters in 36 states, created a sexually hostile work environment for teenaged male employees (including seven charging parties) who worked at defendant's Raleigh, North Carolina theater, in violation of Title VII. The Concessions Manager of the Raleigh theater was a 29-year-old man who had served more than 2 years in prison after being convicted of two counts of taking indecent liberties with a minor. During the 9 months he worked for defendant in 2003, the Concessions Manager subjected the boys he supervised to offensive verbal and physical sexual conduct. Several of the boys complained either to the Office Manager or to the General Manager of the theater, but defendant failed to take corrective action. Defendant finally terminated the Concessions Manager for violating the company's "no call/no show" rule when he failed to come in to work after the police arrested him for failing to register as a sex offender.
Under the 3-year consent decree resolving this case, the 14 claimants (including the charging parties) will share $765,000 in monetary relief. Defendant will also pay all fees and expenses of the mediator that are associated with 2 days of mediation of the suit. The decree provides that defendant will not discriminate against any person based on sex or any other category protected under Title VII and will not retaliate. Defendant will take the following actions at its District 4 Theaters (six theaters located in North Carolina and seven located in southwestern Virginia): revise its sexual harassment policy, provide a copy to all new employees, and post an 11- by 17- inch poster summarizing the policy in a place visible to District 4 employees; provide training to all new employees at the time of hire and to all current managers, supervisors, and employees annually on Title VII's prohibitions against sexual harassment and retaliation and defendant's sexual harassment policy; and report semiannually to the Charlotte District Office on complaints of sexual harassment by employees, including the identity of the complainant and the alleged harasser, and the action taken by defendant.

1 of 1

6/12/2007 1:18 PM