UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
GREENSBORO DIVISION

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, )

)

Defendant.

)

)

)

Case No. 1:07-cv-00592 Jury Trial Demanded

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, United States of America, alleges:

1. This action is brought on behalf of the United States to enforce the

provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et

seq. (“Title VII”).

2. This Court has jurisdiction over the action under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) and

28 U.S.C. § 1345.

3. Defendant, the University of North Carolina, is a governmental body,

established pursuant to the laws of the State of North Carolina.

4. Defendant is a person within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(a), and an

employer within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b).

5. Defendant, at its component institution, North Carolina Agricultural and

Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 1 Filed 08/07/07 Page 1 of 5

Technical State University (“University”), has discriminated against Tasha Murray (“Murray”), who is employed as a Telecommunicator in the University’s Department of Police and Public Safety (“DPPS”), and Mattie Smith (“Smith”), who was formerly employed as a Telecommunicator in the University’s DPPS, on the basis of their sex, female, in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a), by subjecting Murray and Smith to sexual harassment that included:
(a) creating or maintaining a hostile work environment based on sex that adversely affected the terms, conditions, and privileges of Murray and Smith’s employment;
(b) failing or refusing to take appropriate action to remedy the effects of the discriminatory treatment of Murray and Smith.
6. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) received a timely charge of discrimination against the University filed by Murray (Charge Number 145-2005-01844) on September 19, 2005, in which she alleged that she was discriminated against in employment because of her sex, female, by being subjected to sexual harassment.
7. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) received a timely charge of discrimination against the University filed by Smith (Charge Number 145-2006-00150) on January 9, 2006, in which she alleged that she was discriminated
2
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 1 Filed 08/07/07 Page 2 of 5

against in employment because of, inter alia, her sex, female, by being subjected to sexual harassment.
8. Pursuant to Section 706 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5, the EEOC investigated the charges of discrimination filed by Murray and Smith, determined the evidence established that Murray and Smith were sexually harassed by a male supervisor and that the University failed to take reasonable steps to prevent and promptly correct the harassment, attempted unsuccessfully to achieve through conciliation a voluntary resolution of the charges, and subsequently referred the matter to the U.S. Department of Justice.
9. All conditions precedent to the filing of suit have been performed or have occurred.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff United States prays that the Court grant the following relief:
(a) Enjoin Defendant from failing or refusing to take appropriate nondiscriminatory measures to overcome the effects of the discrimination, including the implementation of an effective program to address and prevent sexual harassment against employees in the University’s Department of Police and Public Safety;
(b) Award compensatory damages to Murray and Smith as would fully compensate them for the pain and suffering caused by Defendant’s
3
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 1 Filed 08/07/07 Page 3 of 5

discriminatory conduct as alleged in this Complaint, pursuant to and within
the statutory limitations of Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42
U.S.C. § 1981a;
(c) Award such additional relief as justice may require, together with Plaintiff’s
costs and disbursements in this action.
JURY DEMAND
The United States hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable pursuant to
Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act
of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.
WAN J. KIM Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
By:
/s/ Elaine Grant /s/ Sarah Canzoniero Blutter DAVID J. PALMER (DC Bar No. 417834) Chief WILLIAM B. FENTON (DC Bar No. 414990) Deputy Chief ELAINE GRANT (DC Bar No. 457163) Senior Trial Attorney SARAH CANZONIERO BLUTTER (DC Bar No. 487723) Trial Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Employment Litigation Section 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, PHB 4910 Washington, DC 20530
4
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 1 Filed 08/07/07 Page 4 of 5

Telephone: (202) 305-8686 Telephone: (202) 305-3613 Fax: (202) 514-1005 Email: Elaine.Grant@usdoj.gov Email: Sarah.Blutter@usdoj.gov ANNA MILLS S. WAGONER United States Attorney for the Middle District of North Carolina P.O. Box 1858 Greensboro, NC 27101 Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America
5
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 1 Filed 08/07/07 Page 5 of 5

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

TASHA MURRAY and MATTIE SMITH,

)

)

Intervenor-Plaintiffs,

)

)

vs.

)

)

THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, )

)

Defendant.

)

Case No. 1:07-CV-00592

COMPLAINT OF INTERVENOR-PLAINTIFF TASHA MURRAY COMES NOW INTERVENOR-PLAINTIFF, TASHA MURRAY, by and through counsel, complaining of the defendant named herein, and does hereby allege and aver as follows:
PARTIES 1. Plaintiff, Tasha Murray, is a citizen of and resides in Guilford County, North Carolina. 2. Upon information and belief, defendant The University of North Carolina (“UNC”), including its constituent institution, North Carolina A&T State University (“A&T”) is a North Carolina state body politic and corporate and on information and belief at all times relevant hereto was an educational institution engaging in educational programs and/or activities receiving federal financial assistance within the meaning of Title IX of the Education Act Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (“Title IX”), and was also Ms. Murray’s employer within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”), Title IX, and North Carolina state law.

Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 15 Filed 10/01/07 Page 1 of 8

3. Upon information and belief, UNC and A&T have waived sovereign immunity by the purchase of insurance or by providing self insurance in an amount greater than or equal to $150,000.00.
4. Upon information and belief, the North Carolina A&T State University Campus Police Department itself at all relevant times hereto was a program or activity of an educational institution receiving federal financial assistance within the meaning of Title IX.
FACTS 5. Plaintiff Murray was hired by, and began working for, the defendant UNC/A&T on or about January 2003. 6. During plaintiff’s tenure as a communications technician at A&T, Plaintiff was subjected to and victimized by a long-standing and continuing course of sexually hostile and harassing, abusive and humiliating conduct by her supervisor, Lieutenant William Gilchrist, a manager employed by defendant, while plaintiff was engaged in her work at the workplace, which included, among other things, continual implied demands that plaintiff repeatedly subject herself to the sexual advances of Gilchrist in order to retain her job status, privileges and/or other employment benefits, Gilchrist’s repeated, continual making of lewd, offensive and sexually discriminatory remarks and gestures to plaintiff and in her presence, and Gilchrist’s repeated, continual efforts to view and comment upon plaintiff’s gender-specific body parts. 7. On such occasions as plaintiff would be subjected to the various forms and incidents of sexually harassing conduct as are set forth in paragraph 6 hereinabove, plaintiff would categorically display her displeasure and discomfort at being subjected to same, and would respond in one or more of the following ways: by requesting Gilchrist to discontinue such behavior; by
2
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 15 Filed 10/01/07 Page 2 of 8

telling Gilchrist that she did not feel such conduct and remarks were appropriate; by refusing to offer any verbal acknowledgment of Gilchrist’s inappropriate remarks; by removing herself from Gilchrist’s presence and proximity and attempting to avoid contact with Gilchrist.
8. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and therefore alleges upon such information and belief, that, prior to the time when she was subjected to Lieutenant Gilchrist’s sexually harassing behavior, officials of the A&T campus police, including former Chief of Police Curtis W. Bigelow and Deputy Chief Richetta Slade, had received complaints from one or more other female employees regarding Gilchrist’s sexually harassing conduct, including both verbal and physical harassment, of the type referenced in paragraph 6 above. Plaintiff herself complained about Gilchrist’s conduct to various members of the management of A&T campus police but her complaints were not kept confidential, and plaintiff was informed that she could not expect any investigation of her complaints unless she submitted a written statement of her complaint.
9. Defendant UNC/A&T was aware of Gilchrist’s wrongful conduct by and through the knowledge of its supervisory officers, and defendant UNC/A&T acquiesced in Gilchrist’s sexually harassing conduct toward plaintiff and others, as alleged herein, and permitted same to occur, in that Gilchrist, at all relevant times, maintained his employment with the A&T campus police department, was not disciplined, was instead promoted, and in all respects was permitted to continue to make sexual advances and otherwise create a sexually hostile working environment toward plaintiff without consequence.
10. As a direct and proximate result of defendant’s various acts of wrongdoing as alleged hereinabove, both individually and in aggregate, plaintiff has suffered damages in the form of embarrassment, humiliation, lost enjoyment in her daily activities, and emotional damage.
3
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 15 Filed 10/01/07 Page 3 of 8

11. Plaintiff has filed a timely charge of discrimination with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and has otherwise timely fulfilled all legal conditions precedent to the filing of this complaint.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Title VII Hostile Employment Environment) 12. Plaintiff hereby restates and incorporates by reference each of the allegations of the above-enumerated paragraphs 1 through 11, inclusive, of the complaint as if set forth fully herein. 13. As a result of the conduct of Lieutenant Gilchrist as alleged herein, plaintiff was subjected to intentional sexual harassment in the form of unwelcome sexual advances, sexually demeaning comments and other verbal and physical conduct of a similar nature such that her working environment at UNC/A&T intentionally was rendered severely and pervasively hostile on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C § 2000e-2. 14. As a result of the conduct as alleged herein, with actual notice of Gilchrist’s conduct and the hostile working environment created thereby, the responses of defendant UNC/A&T, acting by and through its managers, to such sexual harassment constituted intentional official decisions not to adequately remedy the violation and were so clearly unreasonable that such responses themselves further intentionally subjected plaintiff to a working environment at UNC/A&T that was abusive and severely and pervasively offensive on the basis of sex. The conduct of defendant UNC/A&T as described herein was systemic and serial and thus constitutes a continuing violation of Title VII. 15. Such working environment had the effect of unreasonably interfering with plaintiff’s work performance and created an intimidating and hostile working environment that
4
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 15 Filed 10/01/07 Page 4 of 8

seriously affected plaintiff’s psychological well-being such that plaintiff suffered a tangible employment action as a result of the hostile working environment.
16. As a direct and proximate result of such sexually hostile working environment and adverse tangible employment actions, plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Title IX Hostile Employment Environment) 17. Plaintiff hereby restates and incorporates by reference each of the allegations of the above-enumerated paragraphs of the complaint as if set forth fully herein. 18. As a result of the conduct of Lieutenant Gilchrist as alleged herein, plaintiff was subjected to intentional sexual harassment in the form of unwelcome sexual advances, sexually demeaning comments and other verbal and physical conduct of a similar nature such that her working environment at UNC/A&T was intentionally rendered severely and pervasively hostile on the basis of sex in violation of Title IX. 19. As a result of the conduct as alleged herein, with actual notice of Gilchrist’s conduct and the hostile working environment created thereby, the responses of defendant UNC/A&T, acting by and through its managers, to such sexual harassment constituted intentional official decisions not to adequately remedy the violation and were so clearly unreasonable that such responses themselves further intentionally subjected plaintiff to a working environment at UNC/A&T that was abusive and severely and pervasively offensive on the basis of sex. The conduct of defendant UNC/A&T as described herein was systemic and serial and thus constitutes a continuing violation of Title IX.
5
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 15 Filed 10/01/07 Page 5 of 8

20. Such working environment had the effect of unreasonably interfering with plaintiff’s work performance and created an intimidating and hostile working environment that seriously affected plaintiff’s psychological well-being such that plaintiff suffered a tangible employment action as a result of the hostile working environment.
21. As a direct and proximate result of such sexually hostile working environment and adverse tangible employment actions, plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays the Court for judgment as follows: 1. That upon her FIRST and SECOND CLAIMS FOR RELIEF, plaintiff have and recover of
defendant all equitable remedies (including but not limited to an injunction to prohibit defendant from continuing its discriminatory conduct) and compensatory damages available at law in such amounts as may be proven at the trial herein, together with such prejudgment interest as is available to plaintiff by law; 2. That defendant be taxed with the entire costs of this action, including the reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by the plaintiff in the prosecution thereof; and 3. That the plaintiff be granted such other and further relief as the Court, in its wisdom, may deem just and proper.
JURY DEMAND Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable which are raised by the pleadings herein.
6
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 15 Filed 10/01/07 Page 6 of 8

This the 1st day of October, 2007.
/s/ David B. Puryear, Jr. David B. Puryear, Jr. NC State Bar No. 11063 puryear@puryearandlingle.com /s/ R. J. Lingle R. J. Lingle NC State Bar No. 18290 lingle@puryearandlingle.com Attorneys for Applicant Intervenor-Plaintiff Mattie Smith PURYEAR & LINGLE, P.L.L.C. Adams Farm Professional Center 5501-E Adams Farm Lane Greensboro, NC 27407-6396 Phone: (336) 218-0227 Fax: (336) 218-0240
7
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 15 Filed 10/01/07 Page 7 of 8

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on this day I electronically filed the foregoing COMPLAINT OF INTERVENOR-PLAINTIFF TASHA MURRAY with the Clerk of Court in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following:
Elaine J. Grant, Esq. elaine.grant@usdoj.gov Sarah C. Blutter, Esq. sarah.blutter@usdoj.gov US Department of Justice – Civil Rights 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, PHB 4017 Washington, DC 20530
Thomas J. Ziko, Esq. tziko@ncdoj.gov John P. Scherer, II, Esq. jscherer@ncdoj.gov N. C. Department of Justice P. O. Box 629 Raleigh, NC 27602 This the 1st day of October, 2007.
/s/ David B. Puryear, Jr. David B. Puryear, Jr. NC State Bar No. 11063 puryear@puryearandlingle.com PURYEAR & LINGLE, P.L.L.C. Adams Farm Professional Center 5501-E Adams Farm Lane Greensboro, NC 27407-6396 Phone: (336) 218-0227
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 15 Filed 10/01/07 Page 8 of 8

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

TASHA MURRAY and MATTIE SMITH,

)

)

Intervenor-Plaintiffs,

)

)

vs.

)

)

THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, )

)

Defendant.

)

Case No. 1:07-CV-00592

COMPLAINT OF INTERVENOR-PLAINTIFF MATTIE SMITH COMES NOW INTERVENOR-PLAINTIFF, MATTIE SMITH, by and through counsel, complaining of the defendant named herein, and does hereby allege and aver as follows:
PARTIES 1. Plaintiff, Mattie Smith, is a citizen of and resides in Guilford County, North Carolina. 2. Upon information and belief, defendant The University of North Carolina (“UNC”), including its constituent institution, North Carolina A&T State University (“A&T”) is a North Carolina state body politic and corporate and on information and belief at all times relevant hereto was an educational institution engaging in educational programs and/or activities receiving federal financial assistance within the meaning of Title IX of the Education Act Amendments of 1972, 20 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. (“Title IX”), and was also Ms. Smith’s employer within the meaning of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”), Title IX, and North Carolina state law.

Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 1 of 9

3. Upon information and belief, UNC and A&T have waived sovereign immunity by the purchase of insurance or by providing self insurance in an amount greater than or equal to $150,000.00.
4. Upon information and belief, the North Carolina A&T State University Campus Police Department itself at all relevant times hereto was a program or activity of an educational institution receiving federal financial assistance within the meaning of Title IX.
FACTS 5. Plaintiff Smith was hired by, and began working for, the defendant UNC/A&T on or about December 2004. 6. During plaintiff’s tenure as a teleommunicator at A&T, Plaintiff was subjected to and victimized by a long-standing and continuing course of sexually hostile and harassing, abusive and humiliating conduct by her supervisor, Lieutenant William Gilchrist, a manager employed by defendant, while plaintiff was engaged in her work at the workplace, which included, among other things, continual implied demands that plaintiff repeatedly subject herself to the sexual advances of Gilchrist in order to retain her job status, privileges and/or other employment benefits, Gilchrist’s repeated, contnuial making of lewd, offensive and sexually discriminatory remarks and gestures to plaintiff and in her presence, and Gilchrist’s repeated, continual efforts to view and comment upon plaintiff’s gender-specific body parts. 7. On such occasions as plaintiff would be subjected to the various forms and incidents of sexually harassing conduct as are set forth in paragraph 6 hereinabove, plaintiff would categorically display her displeasure and discomfort at being subjected to same, and would respond in one or more of the following ways: by requesting Gilchrist to discontinue such behavior; by
2
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 2 of 9

telling Gilchrist that she did not feel such conduct and remarks were appropriate; by refusing to offer any verbal acknowledgment of Gilchrist’s inappropriate remarks; by removing herself from Gilchrist’s presence and proximity and attempting to avoid contact with Gilchrist.
8. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and therefore alleges upon such information and belief, that, prior to the time when she was subjected to Lieutenant Gilchrist’s sexually harassing behavior, officials of the A&T campus police, including former Chief of Police Curtis W. Bigelow and Deputy Chief Richetta Slade, had received complaints from one or more other female officers regarding Gilchrist’s sexually harassing conduct, including both verbal and physical harassment, of the type referenced in paragraph 6 above.
9. Defendant UNC/A&T was aware of Gilchrist’s wrongful conduct by and through the knowledge of its supervisory officers, and defendant UNC/A&T acquiesced in Gilchrist’s sexually harassing conduct toward plaintiff and others, as alleged herein, and permitted same to occur, in that Gilchrist, at all relevant times, maintained his employment with the A&T campus police department, was not disciplined, was instead promoted, and in all respects was permitted to continue to make sexual advances and otherwise create a sexually hostile working environment toward plaintiff without consequence.
10. In or about the second week of July 2005, plaintiff was interviewed by A&T campus police Chief Bigelow regarding reports of sexual harassment of plaintiff by Lieutenant Gilchrist, which were brought to the attention of Bigelow by plaintiff Tasha Murray. On or about November 28, 2005, following plaintiff’s complaints about Gilchrist’s sexual harassment, plaintiff was notified of the termination of her employment as a telecommunicator with the A&T police department, effective December 15, 2005. Plaintiff at all relevant times performed her duties in a satisfactory
3
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 3 of 9

and efficient manner. There was no just cause or reason for terminating plaintiff’s employment. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and therefore alleges upon such information and belief, that the true reason and motive for defendant’s termination of her employment was to retaliate against her for reporting and opposing the sexually hostile work environment created by Gilchrist’s ongoing and pervasive sexual harassment.
11. As a direct and proximate result of defendant’s various acts of wrongdoing as alleged hereinabove, both individually and in aggregate, plaintiff has suffered damages in the form of lost employment, lost income, lost enjoyment in her daily activities, and emotional damage.
12. Plaintiff has filed a timely charge of discrimination with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and has otherwise timely fulfilled all legal conditions precedent to the filing of this complaint.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Title VII Hostile Employment Environment) 13. Plaintiff hereby restates and incorporates by reference each of the allegations of the above-enumerated paragraphs 1 through 12, inclusive, of the complaint as if set forth fully herein. 14. As a result of the conduct of Lieutenant Gilchrist as alleged herein, plaintiff was subjected to sexual harassment in the form of unwelcome sexual advances, sexually demeaning comments and other verbal and physical conduct of a similar nature such that her working environment at UNC/A&T was rendered severely and pervasively hostile on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C § 2000e-2. 15. As a result of the conduct as alleged herein, with actual notice of Gilchrist’s conduct and the hostile working environment created thereby, the responses of defendant
4
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 4 of 9

UNC/A&T, acting by and through its managers, to such sexual harassment constituted intentional official decisions not to adequately remedy the violation and was so clearly unreasonable that such responses themselves further subjected plaintiff to a working environment at UNC/A&T that was abusive and severely and pervasively offensive on the basis of sex. The conduct of defendant UNC/A&T as described herein was systemic and serial and thus constitutes a continuing violation of Title VII.
16. Such working environment had the effect of unreasonably interfering with plaintiff’s work performance and created an intimidating and hostile working environment that seriously affected plaintiff’s psychological well-being such that plaintiff suffered a tangible employment action as a result of the hostile working environment.
17. As a direct and proximate result of such sexually hostile working environment and adverse tangible employment actions, plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Title VII Retaliatory Discharge) 18. Plaintiff hereby restates and incorporates by reference each of the allegations of the above-enumerated paragraphs 1 through 17, inclusive, of the complaint as if set forth fully herein. 19. Defendant retaliated against plaintiff due to her reporting of and opposition to the sexually hostile work environment as alleged herein by terminating plaintiff from her employment in violation of Title VII, specifically 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2. 20. As a direct and proximate result of unlawful retaliation, plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.
5
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 5 of 9

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Title IX Hostile Employment Environment) 21. Plaintiff hereby restates and incorporates by reference each of the allegations of the above-enumerated paragraphs 1 through 17, inclusive, of the complaint as if set forth fully herein. 22. As a result of the conduct of Lieutenant Gilchrist as alleged herein, plaintiff was subjected to intentional sexual harassment in the form of unwelcome sexual advances, sexually demeaning comments and other verbal and physical conduct of a similar nature such that her working environment at UNC/A&T was intentionally rendered severely and pervasively hostile on the basis of sex in violation of Title IX. 23. As a result of the conduct as alleged herein, with actual notice of Gilchrist’s conduct and the hostile working environment created thereby, the responses of defendant UNC/A&T, acting by and through its managers, to such sexual harassment constituted intentional official decisions not to adequately remedy the violation and were so clearly unreasonable that such responses themselves further intentionally subjected plaintiff to a working environment at UNC/A&T that was abusive and severely and pervasively offensive on the basis of sex. The conduct of defendant UNC/A&T as described herein was systemic and serial and thus constitutes a continuing violation of Title IX. 24. Such working environment had the effect of unreasonably interfering with plaintiff’s work performance and created an intimidating and hostile working environment that seriously affected plaintiff’s psychological well-being such that plaintiff suffered a tangible employment action as a result of the hostile working environment. 25. As a direct and proximate result of such sexually hostile working environment
6
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 6 of 9

and adverse tangible employment actions, plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount in excess of $10,000.
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Title IX Retaliatory Discharge) 26. Plaintiff hereby restates and incorporates by reference each of the allegations of the above-enumerated paragraphs 1 through 17, inclusive, of the complaint as if set forth fully herein. 27. Defendant retaliated against plaintiff due to her reporting of and opposition to the sexually hostile work environment as alleged herein by terminating plaintiff from her employment in violation of Title IX. 28. As a direct and proximate result of unlawful retaliation, plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount in excess of $10,000. WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays the Court for judgment as follows: 1. That upon her FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, and FOURTH CLAIMS FOR RELIEF, plaintiff have and recover of defendant all equitable remedies (including but not limited to an injunction to prohibit defendant from continuing its discriminatory conduct) and compensatory damages available at law in such amounts as may be proven at the trial herein, together with such prejudgment interest as is available to plaintiff by law; 2. That defendant be taxed with the entire costs of this action, including the reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by the plaintiff in the prosecution thereof; and 3. That the Plaintiff be granted such other and further relief as the Court, in its wisdom, may deem just and proper.
7
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 7 of 9

JURY DEMAND Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable which are raised by the pleadings herein.
This the 1st day of October, 2007.
/s/ David B. Puryear, Jr. David B. Puryear, Jr. NC State Bar No. 11063 puryear@puryearandlingle.com /s/ R. J. Lingle R. J. Lingle NC State Bar No. 18290 lingle@puryearandlingle.com Attorneys for Applicant Intervenor-Plaintiff Mattie Smith PURYEAR & LINGLE, P.L.L.C. Adams Farm Professional Center 5501-E Adams Farm Lane Greensboro, NC 27407-6396 Phone: (336) 218-0227 Fax: (336) 218-0240
8
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 8 of 9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on this day I electronically filed the foregoing COMPLAINT OF INTERVENOR-PLAINTIFF MATTIE SMITH with the Clerk of Court in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following:
Elaine J. Grant, Esq. elaine.grant@usdoj.gov Sarah C. Blutter, Esq. sarah.blutter@usdoj.gov US Department of Justice – Civil Rights 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, PHB 4017 Washington, DC 20530
Thomas J. Ziko, Esq. tziko@ncdoj.gov John P. Scherer, II, Esq. jscherer@ncdoj.gov N. C. Department of Justice P. O. Box 629 Raleigh, NC 27602 This the 1st day of October, 2007.
/s/ David B. Puryear, Jr. David B. Puryear, Jr. NC State Bar No. 11063 puryear@puryearandlingle.com PURYEAR & LINGLE, P.L.L.C. Adams Farm Professional Center 5501-E Adams Farm Lane Greensboro, NC 27407-6396 Phone: (336) 218-0227
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 16 Filed 10/01/07 Page 9 of 9

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
GREENSBORO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

TASHA MURRAY and MATTIE SMITH, )

)

Intervenor-Plaintiffs, )

)

vs.

)

)

THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, )

)

Defendant.

)

Civil Action No. 1:07-cv-00592 Jury Trial Demanded

GLORIA ADAMS SMOOT,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

vs.

)

)

THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, )

)

Defendant.

)

Civil Action No. 1:07-cv-812

CONSENT DECREE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA

This action was brought by the United States against the University of North

Carolina (“the University”) to enforce the provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act

of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., as amended (“Title VII”), following receipt by the

United States from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of charges of

discrimination filed by Tasha Murray (Charge Number 145-2005-01844) and Mattie

Smith (Charge Number 145-2006- 00150) against the University’s constituent institution,

Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 1 of 28

North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (“NCATSU”). This Court has jurisdiction of the action under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) and 28 U.S.C. § 1345.
The United States’ complaint was filed on August 7, 2007. Intervenor Complaints were filed by Ms. Murray and Ms. Smith on October 1, 2007. By Order dated January 9, 2008, this case was consolidated with Gloria Adams Smoot v. The University of North Carolina, Case No. 1:07-cv-00812 for purposes of pretrial proceedings, including discovery, pretrial motions and mediation. This Consent Decree resolves the complaint filed by the United States in Civil Action No. 1:07cv00592.
In its Complaint, the United States alleges that the University/NCATSU discriminated against Tasha Murray and Mattie Smith on the basis of their sex, female, in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII, among other ways, by:
(a) Creating or maintaining a hostile work environment based on sex that adversely affected the terms, conditions and privileges of Tasha Murray’s and Mattie Smith’s employment;
(b) Failing or refusing to take appropriate action to remedy the effects of the discriminatory treatment of Tasha Murray and Mattie Smith.
The University/NCATSU denies that it has discriminated against Ms. Murray and Ms. Smith in violation of Title VII. Nevertheless, the United States and the University/NCATSU, desiring that this action be settled by an appropriate Consent Decree (“Decree”), and without the burden and risks of protracted litigation, agree to the jurisdiction of this Court over the parties and the subject matter of this action. The United
2
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 2 of 28

States and the University/NCATSU also hereby waive, for purposes of this Decree only, hearings and findings of fact and conclusions of law on all issues, and further agree to the entry of this Decree as final and binding between them with regard to the issues raised in the Complaint filed by the United States in this case. This Decree applies to the University at its constituent institution NCATSU.
This Decree, being entered into with the consent of the United States and the University/NCATSU, shall in no way constitute an adjudication or finding on the merits of the case, nor be construed as an admission by the University/NCATSU or a finding of wrongdoing or violation of any applicable federal law or regulation.
In resolution of this action, the parties hereby AGREE to, and the Court expressly APPROVES, ENTERS and ORDERS, the following:
PARTIES AND DEFINITIONS 1. The parties to this Decree are the United States, by the Department of Justice (“United States”), and the University of North Carolina. 2. The University of North Carolina, its current, former and future agents, employees, officials, designees and successors in interests are referred to as “the University.” 3. North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, its current, former and future agents, employees, officials, designees and successors in interests are referred to as “NCATSU.” 4. Tasha Murray is referred to hereinafter as “Ms. Murray.”
3
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 3 of 28

5. Mattie Smith is referred to hereinafter as “Ms. Smith.” 6. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is referred to hereinafter as the “EEOC.” 7. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., as amended, is referred to hereinafter as “Title VII.”
GENERAL RELIEF 8. The University/NCATSU, by and through its officials, agents, employees and all persons in active concert or participation with the University/NCATSU in the performance of employment or personnel functions, shall not engage in any act or practice that discriminates against any employee or applicant on the basis of sex in violation of Title VII. 9. The University/NCATSU shall not retaliate against or in any way adversely affect the terms and conditions of employment of any person because that person has opposed any practice made unlawful by Title VII, filed a charge with the EEOC, or testified, assisted or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding or hearing under Title VII, including this case or this Decree. 10. Within forty-five (45) days after the date of entry of this Decree, the University/NCATSU shall modify its anti-discrimination policies and procedures that prohibit sex discrimination under Title VII. These modifications shall include: (a) A substitution in the “Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy”
applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees in the section 4
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 4 of 28

entitled “Employee Rights and Responsibilities” of the term “University administrator” with the terms “the University Affirmative Action Officer” (an already existing position) “or any other employee in a supervisory position”; (b) A clarification in the “Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy” applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees ” that an employee has the option to file a complaint verbally with an Affirmative Action Officer or any other employee in a supervisory position (as does a complainant with respect to complaints made to an “Affirmative Action Officer” under the University/NCATSU’s “Sexual Harassment Policy”) at any time; (c) A clarification in the “Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy” applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees identifying the contact information, including phone and office address, for the University/NCATSU Affirmative Action Officer; (d) A description of the term “formal resolution” of a complaint of sexual harassment in the “Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy” applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees as described in the section entitled “Employee Rights and Responsibilities” and a clarification that the University/NCATSU will respond to complaints and seek to prevent and correct sexual harassment regardless of whether an employee
5
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 5 of 28

elects to pursue a formal resolution through the University/NCATSU; (e) A deletion of the reference in the “Unlawful Workplace Harassment
Prevention Policy” applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees as described in the section entitled “Employee Rights and Responsibilities” of a filing requirement of “180 calendar days” for complaints filed with the EEOC; (f) A clarification to the “Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy” applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees that provides that the University/NCATSU will investigate a complaint of sexual harassment whether an employee complains verbally or in writing to a “University administrator”; (g) A clarification to the “Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy” applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees stating that copies of the University/NCATSU’s procedure for handling complaints of unlawful harassment of a University/NCATSU employee, as referenced under the section entitled “Investigation and Resolution Procedure,” including the form for filing a complaint, are accessible at the Human Resources web site with a reference to the applicable web link, including a reference to the applicable web link for the Sexual Harassment Policy and the Racial Harassment Policy; (h) A clarification to the “Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy”
6
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 6 of 28

applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees stating that all interviews, statements and materials obtained during a complaint process and/or investigation of alleged sexual harassment will be kept confidential and will not be distributed or used for any purpose unrelated to the investigation and resolution of the complaint, except as permitted by law; (I) A clarification to the “Sexual Harassment Policy” applicable to Faculty, Staff and Students under the section entitled “Definitions” deleting the phrase “or may have direct employment or academic consequences resulting from the acceptance or rejection of such conduct”; (j) A clarification to the “Sexual Harassment Policy” applicable to Faculty, Staff and Students under the section entitled “Complaint Procedures” that SPA employees may choose to file a grievance or complaint under the Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees (with an attached web link to that policy), the Mediation and Grievance Policy and Procedures for SPA Employees (with an attached web link to that policy), or the sexual harassment complaint procedure described in this Sexual Harassment Policy, with a clarification that use of the Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy applicable to SPA Permanent and Temporary Employees is a required procedure for SPA complainants who want to maintain their appeal rights to the State Personnel Commission;
7
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 7 of 28

(k) A clarification to the “Sexual Harassment Policy” applicable to Faculty, Staff and Students under the section entitled “Complaint Procedures” identifying the contact information, including phone and offices address, for the Affirmative Action Officer and the Vice Chancellor for Human Resources, with a web link to the Sexual Harassment Complaint Form under the section entitled “Filing a Formal Complaint”;
(l) A clarification to the “Sexual Harassment Policy” applicable to Faculty, Staff and Students under the section entitled “Vice Chancellor’s Decision” that the decision of the Vice Chancellor shall be the final step in the formal complaint process;
(m) A clarification to the “Sexual Harassment Policy” applicable to Faculty, Staff and Students under the section entitled “Appeal” that the time period for filing a grievance under the appropriate procedure (after receipt of the Vice Chancellor’s decision) starts to run upon the complainant’s receipt of a written notice of the Vice Chancellor’s final decision;
n) Clarifications and edits to the Mediation and Grievance Policy and Procedures for SPA Employees attached hereto as Appendix C;
(o) The issuance of a General Order by the Chief of NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety, effective upon issuance, clarifying that employees may avail themselves of any of the University/NCATSU’s sexual harassment policies and procedures, and that an employee is not required to 8
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 8 of 28

follow the procedures described in every such policy for any single complaint, but only the procedures described in the policy under which the complainant avails herself or himself. The General Order will also establish that if the complainant does not specify in her/his verbal or written complaint the policy guidance under which she/he is making a complaint, the University/NCATSU’s “Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Plan for University Employees” will apply. In addition, the General Order will state that the University/NCATSU will enforce its sexual harassment policies and procedures with the goal of ensuring that complaints are addressed even if the complaint is not made in exact conformance with the University/NCATSU’s policy. 11. Within sixty (60) days after the date of entry of this Decree, the University/NCATSU shall submit the modified policies and procedures, described in Paragraph 10, above, to the United States for review, comment and approval. 12. Within ten (10) days after the date on which the University/NCATSU implements the modified policies and procedures set forth in Paragraph 10, above, after receiving approval from the United States pursuant to Paragraph 11, above, the University/NCATSU shall distribute copies of such modified policies and procedures to all employees in NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety, and post such modified policies and procedures in all places used for posting general information to employees in NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety, including any internet
9
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 9 of 28

or intranet cites used for that purpose. The University/NCATSU shall also distribute and post all General Orders pertaining to complaints and investigations of sexual harassment in NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety.
13. The University/NCATSU shall ensure that each new employee in NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety receives a copy of the modified policies and procedures set forth in Paragraph 10, above, in addition to all General Orders pertaining to complaints and investigations of sexual harassment in NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety, at the time of the new employee’s hire.
14. No later than ninety (90) days after the date of entry of this Decree, the University/NCATSU shall provide, at its own cost, mandatory training on the law of equal employment opportunity and prohibited discrimination based on sex to all supervisory employees in NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety, including the Chief, Majors, Captains, Lieutenants and Sergeants. The training shall, at a minimum, include an explanation of the University/NCATSU’s policies and procedures, modified as set forth in Paragraph 10, above, as well as all General Orders pertaining to complaints and investigations of sexual harassment in NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety. The University/NCATSU will select, with the concurrence of the United States, a qualified individual or group of individuals to conduct the training outlined in this paragraph. The United States will review and approve any proposed training program prior to its administration.
15. All persons who undergo the training described in Paragraph 14, above, 10
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 10 of 28

shall sign an acknowledgment of attendance at the training. Within ten (10) days of each training, the University/NCATSU shall provide the United States with written confirmation that all persons covered by Paragraph 14, above, attended the training. The University/NCATSU will keep on file all signed acknowledgments for the duration of the Decree.
16. The University/NCATSU shall retain during the term of this Decree all documents, in paper or electronic form (including electronic mail), that come into its possession that are: (a) related to complaints of sex discrimination (formal or informal, verbal or written) made by employees in NCATSU’s Department of Police and Public Safety; and/or (b) related to the training provided for under this Decree. These documents will be kept in accordance with State law record retention requirements. To the extent this Consent Decree has different retention requirements that those required by State law, the terms of the Consent Decree shall govern during the life of the Consent Decree.
17. The United States may review compliance with this Decree at any time. As part of that review, the University/NCATSU shall provide copies of any documents relevant to the University/NCATSU’s compliance with this Decree upon the request of the United States, including but not limited to the documents described in Paragraphs 15 and 16, above.
SPECIFIC RELIEF 18. Without admitting the allegations of the United States as set forth in its
11
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 11 of 28

Complaint, and in settlement of the claims of the United States for relief on behalf of Ms. Murray and Ms. Smith:
(a) The University/NCATSU shall offer to pay Ms. Murray a monetary award of twenty-nine thousand dollars ($29,000), which will be considered compensatory damages.
(b) The University/NCATSU shall offer to pay Ms. Smith a monetary award of twenty-six thousand dollars ($26,000), which will be considered compensatory damages.
© The University/NCATSU will offer not to provide negative employment references for Ms. Murray or Ms. Smith to any future prospective employer that inquires about their employment with the University/NCATSU from January 2003 through 2007 (Ms. Murray) and from December 2004 through December 2005 (Ms. Smith). The University/NCATSU will not refer in any way to Ms. Murray’s or Ms. Smith’s filing of complaints or charges of sex discrimination or this lawsuit when communicating with prospective employers seeking a reference for Ms. Murray or Ms. Smith. If a reference is requested for Ms. Murray or Ms. Smith by a prospective employer, the University/NCATSU will only confirm the length of employment, past salary history, the fact that she received satisfactory ratings, and that she is eligible for rehire.
19. Within fifteen (15) days after the date of entry of this Decree, the 12
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 12 of 28

University/NCATSU shall notify Ms. Murray and Ms. Smith of its terms by mailing to each, in care of their counsel, via certified mail, return receipt requested, copies of the letters as set forth in the attached Appendix A (“Appendix A letters”). The Appendix A letters shall inform Ms. Murray and Ms. Smith, that in order to accept the relief offered to them, they must return the executed Individual Relief and Release of Claims (“Individual Relief and Release”) form, a copy of which is set forth in Appendix B, to the University/NCATSU within twenty-one (21) days of their receipt of the Appendix A letters unless good cause, as determined exclusively by the United States, exists for their failure to do so. A copy of the Individual Relief and Release form and of this Decree shall be enclosed with the Appendix A letters. The University/NCATSU shall provide Ms. Murray and Ms. Smith with all tax forms required by law. The University/NCATSU shall not deduct its share of taxes, if any, from the monetary awards.
20. The University/NCATSU shall provide the United States with a copy of Ms. Murray’s and Ms. Smith’s executed Individual Relief and Release forms within (10) days after its receipt thereof. Within fifteen (15) days from the date of its receipt of Ms. Murray’s and Ms. Smith’s Individual Relief and Release, the University/NCATSU shall mail them each, in care of their counsel, a certified or bank check made payable, respectively, to Tasha Murray and Mattie Smith, in the amount of twenty-nine thousand dollars (Ms. Murray) and twenty-six thousand dollars (Ms. Smith).
21. The University/NCATSU agrees that if Ms. Smith or Ms. Murray should seek employment with the University/NCATSU in the future, their applications will be
13
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 13 of 28

given fair, objective and non-discriminatory consideration.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
22. The parties to this Decree shall attempt to resolve informally any disputes
that may occur under this Decree. If the United States and the University/NCATSU are
unable to reach agreement after informally seeking to resolve a dispute, the issue may be
submitted by either party to the Court for resolution upon at least thirty (30) days written
notice to the other party.
23. All documents required to be delivered under this Decree to the United
States shall be sent to the following address if sent by U.S. mail:
Chief, Employment Litigation Section Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice PHB, Fourth Floor 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530
Documents sent by overnight delivery service should be sent to the following address:
Chief, Employment Litigation Section Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice 601 D Street, N.W., Room 4912 Washington, D.C. 20004
24. All documents required to be delivered under this Decree to the
University/NCATSU shall be sent to the following address:
Thomas J. Ziko Special Deputy Attorney General John P. Scherer, II Assistant Attorney General
14
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 14 of 28

North Carolina Department of Justice 114 W. Edenton Street P.O. Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
JURISDICTION OF THE COURT 25. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this Decree and this cause of action for the purposes of implementing the relief provided herein, and resolving any disputes or entering any orders that may be necessary to implement the relief provided herein. 26. This Decree shall dissolve and this cause of action shall be dismissed, without any further order of this Court, at the end of two (2) years from the date of its approval and entry by this Court. 27. The United States and the University/NCATSU shall bear their own costs in this action, including attorney’s fees, except that the parties shall retain the right to seek costs for any matter which, in the future, may arise from this Decree and require resolution by the Court. It is so ORDERED, this 28th day of April, 2008.
/s/ Thomas D. Schroeder United States District Judge
15
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 15 of 28

AGREED AND CONSENTED TO:
For plaintiff United States of America:
GRACE C. BECKER Acting Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
By:
/s/ Elaine Grant ELAINE GRANT (DC Bar No. 457163) DONALD TUNNAGE (DC Bar No. 448204) Senior Trial Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Employment Litigation Section PHB, Fourth Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Telephone: (202) 305-8686 Email: Elaine.Grant@usdoj.gov
Donald.Tunnage@usdoj.gov
For defendant University of North Carolina:
By:
/s/ Thomas J. Ziko /s/ John P. Scherer, II THOMAS J. ZIKO (N.C. Bar No. 8577) Special Deputy Attorney General JOHN P. SCHERER, II (N.C. Bar. No. 19259) Assistant Attorney General N.C. Department of Justice Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0629 Telephone: (919) 716-6920 Email: tziko@ncdoj.gov Email: jscherer@ncdoj.gov
16
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 16 of 28

APPENDIX A
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
[Date]
Tasha Murray in care of David B. Puryear, Jr. Puryear and Lingle, P.L.L.C. Adams Farm Professional Center 5501-E Adams Farm Lane Greensboro, North Carolina 27407
Re: United States of America v. University of North Carolina, No. (M.D.N.C.)
Dear Ms. Murray:
The United States, by the Department of Justice, and the University of North Carolina (“University”) have entered into a Consent Decree settling the case of United States of America v. The University of North Carolina, No. 1:07-cv-00592 (M.D.N.C.). A copy of the Consent Decree, which was approved and entered by the Court on ________ [date], is enclosed.
Pursuant to the Consent Decree, the University, at its constituent institution, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (NCATSU), is offering to do the following:
1. Pay you a monetary award of $29,000, which will be considered compensatory damages. The award will be paid to you, in care of your counsel, via certified or bank check, within fifteen (15) days of the University/NCATSU’s receipt of your executed Individual Relief and Release of Claims form, which is enclosed with this letter.
2. Agree not to provide negative employment references for you to any future prospective employer that inquires about your employment in the Department of Police and Public Safety at the University/NCATSU, from January 2003 through 2007. The University/NCATSU will not refer in any way to your filing of
17
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 17 of 28

complaints or charges of sex discrimination or this lawsuit when communicating with prospective employers seeking a reference for you. If a reference is requested by a prospective employer, the University/NCATSU will only confirm the length of your employment, your past salary history, the fact that you received satisfactory ratings and that you are eligible for rehire.
3. Agree that if you should seek another position within the University/NCATSU, your application will be given fair, objective and non-discriminatory consideration.
In order to accept the University/NCATSU’s offer, or any part of it, you must execute the enclosed Individual Relief and Release of Claims form and return it, within twenty-one (21) days of your receipt of this letter, to the University/NCATSU’s counsel at:
Thomas J. Ziko Special Deputy Attorney General John P. Scherer, II Assistant Attorney General N.C. Department of Justice Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0629
If you decline the relief offered by the University/NCATSU, the University/NCATSU nevertheless will have satisfied its obligation to the United States pursuant to the Consent Decree, and the United States will not seek additional relief on your behalf.
If you have any questions concerning the Consent Decree or the University/NCATSU’s offer to you, you may contact the following Department of Justice attorneys in Washington, DC:
Elaine Grant Donald Tunnage United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Employment Litigation Section - PHB 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Telephone: (202) 305-8686
(202) 305-2789
18
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 18 of 28

Enclosures

Sincerely,
__________________________ Thomas J. Ziko Special Deputy Attorney General John P. Scherer, II Assistant Attorney General N.C. Department of Justice Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0629

19 Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 19 of 28

APPENDIX A
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
[Date]
Mattie Smith in care of David B. Puryear, Jr. Puryear and Lingle, P.L.L.C. Adams Farm Professional Center 5501-E Adams Farm Lane Greensboro, North Carolina 27407
Re: United States of America v. University of North Carolina, No. (M.D.N.C.)
Dear Ms. Smith:
The United States, by the Department of Justice, and the University of North Carolina (“University”) have entered into a Consent Decree settling the case of United States of America v. The University of North Carolina, No. 1:07-cv-00592 (M.D.N.C.). A copy of the Consent Decree, which was approved and entered by the Court on ________ [date], is enclosed.
Pursuant to the Consent Decree, the University, at its constituent institution, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University (NCATSU), is offering to do the following:
1. Pay you a monetary award of $26,000, which will be considered compensatory damages. The award will be paid to you, in care of your counsel, via certified or bank check, within fifteen (15) days of the University/NCATSU’s receipt of your executed Individual Relief and Release of Claims form, which is enclosed with this letter.
2. Agree not to provide negative employment references for you to any future prospective employer that inquires about your employment in the Department of Police and Public Safety at the University/NCATSU, from December 2004 through December 2005. The University/NCATSU will not refer in any way to your filing of complaints or charges of sex discrimination or this lawsuit when communicating
20
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 20 of 28

with prospective employers seeking a reference for you. If a reference is requested by a prospective employer, the University/NCATSU will only confirm the length of your employment, your past salary history, the fact that you received satisfactory ratings and that you are eligible for rehire.
3. Agree that if you should seek another position within the University/NCATSU, your application will be given fair, objective and non-discriminatory consideration.
In order to accept the University/NCATSU’s offer, or any part of it, you must execute the enclosed Individual Relief and Release of Claims form and return it, within twenty-one (21) days of your receipt of this letter, to the University/NCATSU’s counsel at:
Thomas J. Ziko Special Deputy Attorney General John P. Scherer, II Assistant Attorney General N.C. Department of Justice Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0629
If you decline the relief offered by the University/NCATSU, the University/NCATSU nevertheless will have satisfied its obligation to the United States pursuant to the Consent Decree, and the United States will not seek additional relief on your behalf.
If you have any questions concerning the Consent Decree or the University/NCATSU’s offer to you, you may contact the following Department of Justice attorneys in Washington, DC:
Elaine Grant Donald Tunnage United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Employment Litigation Section - PHB 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 Telephone: (202) 305-8686
(202) 305-2789
Sincerely,
21
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 21 of 28

Enclosures

__________________________ Thomas J. Ziko Special Deputy Attorney General John P. Scherer, II Assistant Attorney General N.C. Department of Justice Post Office Box 629 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602-0629

22 Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 22 of 28

APPENDIX B INDIVIDUAL RELIEF AND RELEASE OF CLAIMS
IF YOU ARE ACCEPTING THE RELIEF, OR ANY PART OF THE RELIEF, OFFERED TO YOU, YOU MUST COMPLETE THE REST OF THIS FORM, HAVE IT NOTARIZED AND POST-MARKED BY _____________[DATE]. A pre-addressed envelope is enclosed which you may use to return this form. You must return this form to the address on the envelope within twenty-one (21) days of your receipt of this letter unless you show good cause for not meeting this deadline. The envelope enclosing this form must be postmarked by _________ [date]. If you have any questions about how to complete this form, you may contact Elaine Grant or Donald Tunnage at the United States Department of Justice at (202) 305-8686 or (202) 305-2789.
RELEASE OF CLAIMS
For and in consideration of the acceptance of all or any part of the relief offered to me by the University of North Carolina (“University”), pursuant to the provisions of the Consent Decree entered by the Honorable Thomas D. Schroeder, United States District Judge, on April 28, 2008 in United States of America v. The University of North Carolina, No. 1:07-cv-00592 (M.D.N.C.), I, Tasha Murray, forever release and discharge the University and its constituent organization, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, and all current, former and future agents, employees, officials, designees, predecessors and successors in interest from all legal and equitable claims, arising out of the Complaint filed by the United States in the above-captioned civil action and EEOC Charge Number 145-2005-01844 accruing prior to the date of this release.
I understand that the relief to be given to me does not constitute an admission by the University of the validity of any claim raised by me or on my behalf, nor does it constitute a finding of any wrongdoing or violation of any applicable federal law or regulation.
This release constitutes the entire agreement between the University and me, without exception or exclusion.
I acknowledge that a copy of the Consent Decree in this action has been made available to me for my review.
23
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 23 of 28

I HAVE READ THIS RELEASE AND UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS THEREOF, AND I EXECUTE THIS RELEASE OF MY OWN FREE ACT AND DEED.
Signed this _____ day of _________________, 200__. ___________________________________ Signature
Subscribed and sworn to before me this _____ day of _______________, 200__ _________________________________ Notary Public My Commission expires: ____________
24
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 24 of 28

APPENDIX B INDIVIDUAL RELIEF AND RELEASE OF CLAIMS
IF YOU ARE ACCEPTING THE RELIEF, OR ANY PART OF THE RELIEF, OFFERED TO YOU, YOU MUST COMPLETE THE REST OF THIS FORM, HAVE IT NOTARIZED AND POST-MARKED BY _____________[DATE]. A pre-addressed envelope is enclosed which you may use to return this form. You must return this form to the address on the envelope within twenty-one (21) days of your receipt of this letter unless you show good cause for not meeting this deadline. The envelope enclosing this form must be postmarked by _________ [date]. If you have any questions about how to complete this form, you may contact Elaine Grant or Donald Tunnage at the United States Department of Justice at (202) 305-8686 or (202) 305-2789.
RELEASE OF CLAIMS
For and in consideration of the acceptance of all or any part of the relief offered to me by the University of North Carolina (“University”), pursuant to the provisions of the Consent Decree entered by the Honorable Thomas D. Schroeder, United States District Judge, on April 28, 2008 in United States of America v. The University of North Carolina, No. 1:07-cv-00592 (M.D.N.C.), I, Mattie Ruth Smith, forever release and discharge the University and its constituent organization, North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, and all current, former and future agents, employees, officials, designees, predecessors and successors in interest from all legal and equitable claims, arising out of the Complaint filed by the United States in the above-captioned civil action and EEOC Charge Number 145-2006-00150 accruing prior to the date of this release.
I understand that the relief to be given to me does not constitute an admission by the University of the validity of any claim raised by me or on my behalf, nor does it constitute a finding of any wrongdoing or violation of any applicable federal law or regulation.
This release constitutes the entire agreement between the University and me, without exception or exclusion.
I acknowledge that a copy of the Consent Decree in this action has been made available to me for my review.
25
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 25 of 28

I HAVE READ THIS RELEASE AND UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS THEREOF, AND I EXECUTE THIS RELEASE OF MY OWN FREE ACT AND DEED.
Signed this _____ day of _________________, 200__. ___________________________________ Signature
Subscribed and sworn to before me this _____ day of _______________, 200__ _________________________________ Notary Public My Commission expires: ____________
26
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 26 of 28

APPENDIX C
Clarifications to the Mediation and Grievance Policy and Procedures for SPA Employees
Policy
Any career State employee having a grievance arising out of or due to employment shall first discuss the problem or grievance with his/her supervisor or another supervisor if the alleged harasser is the supervisor, and follow the grievance procedure established by the University.
Filing Grievance
An eligible employee who wishes to file an appeal internally, under the University Mediation and Grievance Policy Procedures, must file the grievance within 15 calendar days of the date the employee learned (or with reasonable effort should have known) of the action being contested, except that complaints of discrimination, including workplace harassment, must be submitted within 30 calendar days of the notice of the alleged discriminatory action. See the attached Employee Grievance and Appeal Filing Form.
Step 3 - Appeal to the State Personnel Commission
EXCEPTION: Allegations of illegal discrimination or unlawful workplace harassment are exceptions. Grievances alleging discrimination may, at the grievant’s choice, proceed either through: 1) the University internal complaint process as described in the University’s anti-discrimination/anti-harassment policies; 2) the University grievance procedure described herein; or 3) directly through the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). For State Personnel Act employees who want to maintain their appeal rights to the State Personnel Commission, complaints of unlawful workplace harassment must proceed through the University’s Unlawful Workplace Harassment procedure as described in the Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy, available on the University’s web site at http://facultypages.ncat.edu/hr/Documents/New%20HR%20Policies/PDF/NCAT_UNLA WFUL_WORKPLACE_HARASSMENT_POLICY.pdf, with a right to appeal directly to the State Personnel Commission within 30 calendar days after receipt of the University’s final decision pursuant to the Unlawful Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy.
Discrimination Grievances
27
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 27 of 28

Employees who decide to exhaust the University internal complaint process as described in the University’s anti-discrimination/anti-harassment policies or the grievance procedure described herein must abide by all the requirements of the chosen process. A direct appeal to the State Personnel Commission alleging discrimination must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings within 30 calendar days after receipt of the final decision of the University pursuant to the applicable internal complaint process or the grievance procedure described herein. Grievances filed on an untimely basis must be dismissed. Allegations of discrimination raised more than 30 calendar days after receipt of notice of the occurrence of the alleged discriminatory act must be dismissed as untimely.
Procedure for Appeal To the State Personnel Commission
A petition for a Contested Case Hearing (Form H-06A) must be filed (received) within 30 calendar days of the final agency decision from the University or within 30 calendar days of the action or omission giving rise to the right of appeal at:
Procedure to File a Charge With EEOC
State employees and local government employees must file a timely charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or the Office of Administrative Hearings. The charge form may be completed by contacting either of the two offices below:
Intake Coordinator Office of Administrative Hearings Civil Rights Division 1200 Front Street, Suite 101 Raleigh, NC 27609 (919) 733-0431
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Greensboro Local Office Suite 201 2303 W. Meadowview Road Greensboro, NC 27407 (800) 669-4000
28
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 33 Filed 04/28/08 Page 28 of 28

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

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

TASHA MURRAY and MATTIE SMITH,

)

)

Intervenor-Plaintiffs,

)

)

vs.

)

)

THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, )

)

Defendant.

)

Case No. 1:07-CV-00592

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Intervenor-Plaintiffs, Tasha Murray and Mattie Smith, and Defendant, The University of North Carolina, by and through their respective undersigned counsel of record, each hereby stipulate pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1), F. R. Civ. P., that all claims alleged or which could have been alleged in the respective complaints of the above named intervenor-plaintiffs shall be dismissed with prejudice and that each of the parties hereto shall bear their own respective costs and fees.

This the 23rd day of May, 2008.

/s/ David B. Puryear, Jr. David B. Puryear, Jr. NC State Bar No. 11063 Attorney for Intervenor-Plaintiffs Tasha Murray and Mattie Smith PURYEAR AND LINGLE, P.L.L.C. Adams Farm Professional Center 5501-E Adams Farm Lane Greensboro, NC 27407 Telephone: (336) 218-0227 Fax: (336) 218-0240 Email: puryear@puryearandlingle.com

ROY COOPER ATTORNEY GENERAL /s/ John P. Scherer, II Thomas J. Ziko, Esq. Special Deputy Attorney General NC State Bar No. 8577 John P. Scherer, II, Esq. Assistant Attorney General NC State Bar No. 19259 Attorneys for Defendant N. C. Department of Justice P. O. Box 629 Raleigh, NC 27602 Telephone: (919) 716-6920 Fax: (919) 716-6764 Email: tziko@ncdoj.gov Email: jscherer@ncdoj.gov

Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 34 Filed 05/23/08 Page 1 of 2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on this day I electronically filed the foregoing STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE with the Clerk of Court in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following:
Elaine J. Grant, Esq. elaine.grant@usdoj.gov Sarah C. Blutter, Esq. sarah.blutter@usdoj.gov US Department of Justice – Civil Rights 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, PHB 4017 Washington, DC 20530
Thomas J. Ziko, Esq. Special Deputy Attorney General tziko@ncdoj.gov John P. Scherer, II, Esq. Assistant Attorney General jscherer@ncdoj.gov NC Department of Justice 9001 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-9001
This the 23rd day of May, 2008.
/s/ David B. Puryear, Jr. David B. Puryear, Jr. NC State Bar No. 11063 puryear@puryearandlingle.com PURYEAR & LINGLE, P.L.L.C. Adams Farm Professional Center 5501-E Adams Farm Lane Greensboro, NC 27407-6396 Phone: (336) 218-0227
2
Case 1:07-cv-00592-TDS-WWD Document 34 Filed 05/23/08 Page 2 of 2

 
 18RA,CLOSED,LEAD,MEDIATION,SO30
U.S. District Court North Carolina Middle District (NCMD) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:07−cv−00592−TDS−WWD

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA Assigned to: JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER Referred to: MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON Cause: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 08/07/2007 Date Terminated: 04/28/2008 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

represented by ELAINE J. GRANT DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE − CIVIL RIGHTS 950 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW, PHB 4910 WASHINGTON, DC 20530 202−305−8686 Fax: 202−514−1005 Email: elaine.grant@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

SARAH C. BLUTTER DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE − CIVIL RIGHTS 950 PENNSYLVANIA AVE., NW, PHB 4017 WASHINGTON, DC 20530 202−305−3613 Fax: 202−514−1005 Email: sarah.blutter@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Intervenor Plaintiff TASHA MURRAY
Intervenor Plaintiff MATTIE SMITH

represented by DAVID B. PURYEAR , JR. PURYEAR AND LINGLE, P.L.L.C. 5501−E ADAMS FARM LN. ADAMS FARM PROFESSION CTR. GREENSBORO, NC 27407 336−218−0227 Fax: 336−218−0240 Email: puryear@puryearandlingle.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by DAVID B. PURYEAR , JR. (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA

represented by THOMAS J. ZIKO N. C. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Date Filed 08/07/2007
08/07/2007
08/07/2007 08/08/2007 08/08/2007 08/08/2007 08/17/2007
08/17/2007
08/17/2007
08/17/2007 08/17/2007 08/17/2007 08/17/2007
08/20/2007

POB 629 RALEIGH, NC 27602 919−716−6920 Fax: 919−716−6764 Email: tziko@ncdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
JOHN P. SCHERER , II N. C. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE POB 629 RALEIGH, NC 27602−0629 919−716−6920 Fax: 919−716−6764 Email: jscherer@ncdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA against THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(GRANT, ELAINE) (Entered: 08/07/2007)
2 CIVIL COVER SHEET, filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(GRANT, ELAINE). Modified on 8/7/2007 replaced corrected cover sheet and added attachment (Garrett, Kim). (Entered: 08/07/2007)
CASE REFERRED to Standing Order 30 (McClain, Abby) (Entered: 08/08/2007)
3 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney SARAH C. BLUTTER on behalf of Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered: 08/08/2007)
4 Summons Issued as to THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (McClain, Abby) (Entered: 08/08/2007)
5 Notice of Right to Consent. Counsel shall serve the attached form on all parties. (McClain, Abby) (Entered: 08/08/2007)
6 REQUEST FOR WAIVER of Service sent to Thomas J. Ziko on August 14, 2007 by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.Waiver of Service due by 9/13/2007. (BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered: 08/17/2007)
7 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA waiver sent on 8/14/2007, answer due 10/15/2007. (BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered: 08/17/2007)
8 MOTION to Intervene by Tasha Murray, Mattie Smith. Responses due by 9/10/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Complaint of Intervenor−Plaintiff Tasha Murray# 2 Appendix Complaint of Intervenor−Plaintiff Mattie Smith# 3 Text of Proposed Order)(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 08/17/2007)
9 Brief Of Applicant Intervenor−Plaintiffs In Support of Motion To Intervene BRIEF re 8 MOTION to Intervene. (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 08/17/2007)
10 AFFIDAVIT of Tasha Murray filed by Intervenor Plaintiff Tasha Murray. (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 08/17/2007)
11 AFFIDAVIT of Mattie Smith re 8 MOTION to Intervene filed by Intervenor Plaintiff Mattie Smith. (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 08/17/2007)
12 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney DAVID B. PURYEAR, JR on behalf of Intervenor Plaintiffs Tasha Murray, Mattie Smith (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 08/17/2007)
13 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney THOMAS J. ZIKO on behalf of Defendant THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA (ZIKO, THOMAS) (Entered: 08/20/2007)

Case: 1:07-cv-592 document<docnum> filed <datefiled> 2 of 4

09/19/2007 09/20/2007 10/01/2007
10/01/2007 10/01/2007 10/02/2007 10/05/2007
10/08/2007 10/15/2007 10/23/2007 10/23/2007 10/24/2007 11/29/2007 12/27/2007 12/27/2007 12/27/2007
12/28/2007 01/02/2008

***Motions Referred: 8 MOTION to Intervene to Judge WALLACE W. DIXON − (McCarty, Dianne) (Entered: 09/19/2007)
14 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney JOHN P. SCHERER, II on behalf of Defendant THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA (SCHERER, JOHN) (Entered: 09/20/2007)
ORDER granting 8 Motion to Intervene. The attorneys for the Plaintiff−Intervenors are DIRECTED to file and serve the Intervenors' complaints as the rules require. Signed by Judge WALLACE W. DIXON on 10/1/2007. (DIXON, WALLACE) (Entered: 10/01/2007)
15 Intervenor COMPLAINT, filed by Tasha Murray.(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 10/01/2007)
16 Intervenor COMPLAINT, filed by Mattie Smith.(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 10/01/2007)
17 Summons Issued as to THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (Attachments: # 1 Additional summons)(McClain, Abby) (Entered: 10/02/2007)
18 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE by Affidavit of Service of Process by Certified Mail as to THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA served on 10/3/2007, answer due 10/23/2007. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Summons# 2 Exhibit Service Transmittal Letter# 3 Exhibit Certified Mail Return Receipt)(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 10/05/2007)
19 Notice to Parties RE: SO30. Responses due by 11/13/2007 (McCarty, Dianne) (Entered: 10/08/2007)
20 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (SCHERER, JOHN) (Entered: 10/15/2007)
21 ANSWER to Intervenor Complaint of Intervenor−Plaintiff Tasha Murray by THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (SCHERER, JOHN) (Entered: 10/23/2007)
22 ANSWER to Intervenor Complaint of Intervenor−Plaintiff Mattie Smith by THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA. (SCHERER, JOHN) (Entered: 10/23/2007)
Case Reassigned to Judge JAMES A. BEATY, JR. Judge UNASSIGNED no longer assigned to the case. (Powell, Gloria) (Entered: 10/24/2007)
23 NOTICE of Initial Pretrial Conference Hearing: Initial Pretrial Conference Hearing set for 1/9/2008 09:30 AM in Durham Courtroom #1 before MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON. (Williamson, Wanda) (Entered: 11/29/2007)
24 Rule 26(f) Report (Joint) filed by all parties by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered: 12/27/2007)
25 MOTION to Consolidate Cases. Case to be consolidated with 1:07−cv−00812 by TASHA MURRAY, MATTIE SMITH. Responses due by 1/19/2008 (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 12/27/2007)
26 BRIEF re 25 MOTION to Consolidate Cases. Case to be consolidated with 1:07−cv−00812. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Brief In Support Of Unopposed Motion To Consolidate, No. 1:07−cv−00812)(PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 12/27/2007)
***Motions Referred: 24 Rule 26(f) Report (Joint) filed by all parties to MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON. (Williamson, Wanda) (Entered: 12/28/2007)
ORDER approving 24 RULE 26F REPORT (JOINT). Signed by MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON on 1/2/2008. All discovery, including general and expert, shall be completed by August 29, 2008. Plaintiff can request leave to join additional parties or amend pleadings until March 1, 2008. Defendant can request leave to join additional parties or amend pleadings until April 1, 2008. Case−management track is established as complex. Mediator shall be Jonathan R.

Case: 1:07-cv-592 document<docnum> filed <datefiled> 3 of 4

01/03/2008
01/03/2008 01/09/2008
01/14/2008 01/16/2008 01/16/2008 01/24/2008 02/05/2008 02/06/2008 02/06/2008 03/12/2008 03/31/2008
04/04/2008 04/14/2008 04/17/2008 04/28/2008 05/23/2008

Harkavy. Trial of this case is expected to take approximately 4−5 days. A jury trial has been demanded. (DIXON, WALLACE) Modified on 1/3/2008 to supplement text (Law, Trina). (Entered: 01/02/2008)
Set Scheduling Order Deadlines: Amended Pleadings by Plaintiff due by 3/1/2008. Amended Pleadings by Defendant due by 04/1/2008. Joinder of Parties by Plaintiff due by 3/1/2008. Joinder of Parties by Defendant due by 04/1/2008. Discovery due by 8/29/2008. (Law, Trina) (Entered: 01/03/2008)
***Motions Referred: 25 MOTION to Consolidate Cases. Case to be consolidated with 1:07−cv−00812 to MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON. (Williamson, Wanda) (Entered: 01/03/2008)
27 ORDER signed by MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON on 01/09/08, granting 25 Motion to Consolidate Cases, that the motions of Tasha Murray, Mattie Smith and Gloria Adams Smoot to consolidate these actions, for purposes of pretrial discovery and motion proceedings, and mediation, shall be and HEREBY IS GRANTED. For ease of administration of these cases, all filings henceforth must contain the double caption as on this order with case number 07CV592 being the lead case, and all filings in the two cases will be maintained by the clerk in case number 07CV592. (Law, Trina) (Entered: 01/09/2008)
28 Joint MOTION for Protective Order by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Responses due by 2/6/2008. (Attachments: # 1 Stipulated Protective Order)(BLUTTER, SARAH) (Entered: 01/14/2008)
***Motions Referred: 28 Joint MOTION for Protective Order to MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON. (Kemp, Donita) (Entered: 01/16/2008)
29 STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER Re: confidential information as set out; Signed by MAG/JUDGE WALLACE W. DIXON on 01/16/08. (Law, Trina) (Entered: 01/16/2008)
Case Reassigned to JUDGE TOM SCHROEDER. CHIEF JUDGE JAMES A. BEATY, JR. no longer assigned to the case. (Powell, Gloria) (Entered: 01/24/2008)
CASE REFERRED to Mediation pursuant to Local Rule 83.9b of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of this Court. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered: 02/06/2008)
MEDIATION SCHEDULING ORDER; Mediation due by 6/29/2008. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered: 02/06/2008)
30 ORDER Appointing JONATHAN R. HARKAVY as the mediator pursuant to LR 83.9d(a). Signed by John S. Brubaker, Clerk of Court. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered: 02/06/2008)
31 NOTICE of Hearing: Jury Trial set for 4/6/2009 09:30 AM in Unassigned Courtroom. Trial brief due 3/17/2009 (McCarty, Dianne) (Entered: 03/12/2008)
32 Joint MOTION for Entry of Consent Decree by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Responses due by 4/23/2008. (Attachments: # 1 Consent Decree Between the United States and the University of North Carolina, # 2 Order of Approval)(GRANT, ELAINE) (Entered: 03/31/2008)
***Motions Submitted: 32 Joint MOTION for Entry of Consent Decree to JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER− (Powell, Gloria) (Entered: 04/04/2008)
Case Reported Settled Prior to Mediation (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered: 04/14/2008)
NOTICE of Docket Text/Event Modification on 4/17/2008; the previous docket entry re: Stipulation of Dismissal due was inadvertently docketed and has been removed from the docket. (Gammon, Cheryl) (Entered: 04/17/2008)
33 CONSENT DECREE BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA signed by JUDGE THOMAS D. SCHROEDER on 04/28/08, as set out; (Law, Trina) (Entered: 04/28/2008)
34 STIPULATION of Dismissal of University of North Carolina by TASHA MURRAY, MATTIE SMITH. (PURYEAR, DAVID) (Entered: 05/23/2008)

Case: 1:07-cv-592 document<docnum> filed <datefiled> 4 of 4