--

Roger H. Hoole 5089 Heather E. Morrison 6945 HOOLE & KING, L.C. 4276 South Highland Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 Telephone: (80\) 272-7556
Attorneys for Plaintiff in Intervention, Crystle Collins
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY and TRISPUR INVESTMENTS, INC.,
Defendants.

VERIFIED AMENDED COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION

CRYSTLE COLLINS,
Plaintiff in Intervention,
vs.
TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., a.k.a. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENTS, INC., a.k.a. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, d.b.a. SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY; and TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT L.L.C., a.k.a. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT II

Civil No. 2:00CV00774B Judge Dee V. Benson

L.L.C., d.b.a. SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY; and BERKLEY CORPORATION, d.b.a. SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY; and DOES I THROUGH V, d.b.a. SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,
Defendants.
Plaintiff, Crystle Collins, hereby complains, alleges and demands of Defendants as follows. PARTIES
I. At all times material hereto, Crystle Collins ( hereinafter "Miss Colliils"), was a 16 year old female citizen of the United States of America and a resident of Sait Lake County, State of Utah.
2. Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., a.k.a. Tri-Spur Investments, Inc., a.k.a. Tri-Spur Investment Company, is a corporation organized in a state other than Utah, and is authorized to and is doing business in at least Utah through various names, including but not limited to Sbarro's Italian Eatery, Orange Julius and/or Dairy Queen.
3. Tri-Spur Investment L.L.C., a.k.a. Tri-Spur Investment II L.L.C.,is a limited liability corporation organized in a state other than Utah, and is authorized to and is doing business in at least Utah through various names, including but not limited to Sbarro's Italian Eatery, Orange Julius and/or Dairy Queen.
4. Berkley Corporation is a corporation organized in a state other than Utah, and is authorized to and is doing business in at least Utah through various names, including but not limited to Sbarro's Italian Eatery, Orange Julius and/or Dairy Queen.
-2-

5. Defendants Does I through V, whose identities have not yet been determined, are believed to be persons or entities doing business in at least Utah as Sbarro's Italian Eatery, Orange Julius and/or Dairy Queen. Miss Collins reserves the right to amend this Complaint once the true and correct identities of the Defendants named herein as Does, are determined.
6. Drue Corporation is a corporation organized in a state other than Utah, and is authorized to and is doing business in at least Utah through various names, including but not limited to Sbarro's Italian Eatery, Orange Julius and/or Dairy Queen.
7. Jerome Bowen Enterprises, Inc. is a corporation organized in a state other than Utah, and is doing business through various names, including but not limited to Sbarro' s Italian Eatery, Orange Julius and/or Dairy Queen.
8. All of the Defendants identified in paragraphs 2-5, together with Drue Corporation and Jerome Bowen Enterprises, Inc., have interrelated operations, headquartered at 116 South Center, Rexburg, Idaho, with centralized control over labor relations and common management, common ownership and common financial control.
9. Because of the integration of their management and operations, and the absence of an arm's length relationship among the Defendants identified in paragraphs 2-5, together with Drue Corporation and Jerome Bowen Enterprises, Inc., all the Defendants identified in paragraphs 2-5, together with Drue Corporation and Jerome Bowen Enterprises, Inc., are a single employer for purposes of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (hereinafter "Title VII") and are therefore referred to collectively herein as "Tri-Spur".
-3-

10. At all times material hereto, Tri-Spur was an "employer" subject to suit under Title VII in that Tri-Spur was engaged in an industry affecting commerce and had 15 or more employees for each working day of 20 or more calendar weeks in the year of, or preceding, the filing of this Complaint, and had been continuously engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Title VII.
11. At all times material hereto, Felipe, a.k.a. Felipe Sanchez, a.k.a. Felipe Lisceno (hereinafter "Mr. Sanchez"), was an employee of Tri-Spur working at one or more of its Sbarro's restaurants, including the Sbarro's restaurant where Miss Collins worked located at the Fashion Place Mall in Murray, Utah.
12. At times material hereto, Jose, a.k.a. Jose Soto, a.k.a. Jose Gonzalez (hereinafter "Mr. Soto") was a Co-Manager andlor Chief Trainer working in various Sbarro's restaurants, including the restaurant located at the Fashion Place Mall where Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins worked. At times material hereto, Mr. Soto was Mr. Sanchez's and Miss Collins' immediate supervisor with immediate or successively higher supervisory authority to make or influence employment decisions regarding Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins, and particularly the terms and conditions of their employment, including whether to hire and fire them.
13. At times material hereto, Kelly Schaeffer (hereinafter "Mr. Schaeffer") was the CoManager of the Sbarro's restaurant located at the Fashion Place Mall where Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins worked. Mr. Schaeffer was an immediate supervisor ofMr. Sanchez and Miss Collins, with immediate or successively higher supervisory authority to make or influence employment decisions
-4-

regarding Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins, and particularly the terms and conditions ofMr. Sanchez's and Miss Collins' employment, including whether to hire and fire Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins.
14. At all times material hereto, Tonya Thompson (hereinafter "Ms. Thompson") was the Co-Manager of the Sbarro's restaurant located in the Fashion Place Mall where Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins worked. Ms. Thompson was Mr. Sanchez's and Miss Collins' immediate supervisor with immediate or successively higher supervisory authority to make or influence employment decisions regarding Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins, and particularly the terms and conditions ofMr. Sanchez's and Miss Collins' employment, including whether to hire and fire Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins.
15. At all times material hereto, Mr. Sanchez, Mr. Soto, Mr. Schaeffer and Ms. Thompson were agents, employees and servants of Tri-Spur, acting within the course and scope of such agency and employment, and with the permission, consent and ratification of Tri-Spur.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 16. Jurisdiction ofthe subject matter ofthis Action is established in this Court under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(t)(3). 17. Venue for this Action is proper in this Court because a substantial part ofthe unlawful employment practices alleged herein were committed in Salt Lake County, Utah and within this Court's judicial district. 18. On or about January 28, 1998, Miss Collins timely filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Utah Anti-Discrimination and Labor Division and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter "EEOC'). On April 13, 2000, the EEOC issued a For Cause
-5-

Determination on the merits of Miss Collins' Charge of Discrimination. Copies of Miss Collins' Charge ofDiscrimination and the EEOC's For Cause Determination are respectively attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B", and inCOrPorated herein by this reference.
19. Before this Action was commenced by the EEOC, the parties, including Miss Collins, attempted conciliation but despite those efforts, conciliation failed.
20. After exhausting all administrative pre-requisites, the EEOC brought this action in which Miss Collins, Plaintiff in Intervention, was permitted to intervene pursuant to this Court's Order dated February 26, 2001.
FACTS 21. In July, 1997, Miss Collins became employed by Tri-Spur as a prep cook, server, cashier and dishwasher in its Sbarro's restaurant located at the Fashion Place Mall. 22. Shortly after Miss Collins became employed by Tri-Spur, Mr. Sanchez began to subject her to unwelcome and offensive comments of an explicit sexual nature, in both English and Spanish. For example, using English and/or Spanish, Mr. Sanchez frequently:
a. Propositioned Miss Collins for sex; b. Told her the different places where he and she could "fuck", such as her car, his car or at Sbarro's, etc.; c. Told Miss Collins to "suck my dick" and to "suck me"; d. Called Miss Collins a "hoe", a "bitch", a "slut", a "fucker", a "fucking bitch", and a "fucking slut", etc; e. Told Miss Collins that he could "fuck" her "real good";
-6-

f.

Told Miss Collins that he had dreams about them having sex;

g. Told Miss Collins that he had "wet dreams" about her;

h. Told Miss Collins that he wanted to rape her because she would not have sex

with him;

i.

Told Miss Collins that she had nice "tits";

j.

Told Miss Collins that she needed a "boob job" because her "boobs" were too

little to satisfy him;

k. Whistled and whispered grunting sounds of a sexual nature to Miss Collins

as she worked;

I.

Said he was "fucking horny"; and

m. Made other comments to her of an offensive sexual nature.

23. Mr. Sanchez often called Miss Collins names in Spanish, such as "puta madre", which

means "mother fucker". He gave her the nickname "Pendeja" which means "slut" in Spanish, and

as a result, some other Tri-Spur employees also called her that. Miss Collins, who speaks Spanish

like many other Tri-Spur employees, found these comments and nicknames offensive, humiliating

and embarrassing.

24. Mr. Sanchez made Miss Collins look at photographs, including 2 photographs of a

naked girl lying in sexual positions. Mr. Sanchez bragged to Miss Collins that he had "fucked her"

in Mexico. Later, he told Miss Collins that although the girl in the pictures had not wanted to have

sex with him, he had forced her to and that he wished she had been Miss Collins instead.

-7-

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

Although Miss Collins did not know if Mr. Sanchez had actually raped the girl, his claims

frightened and intimidated her.

25. Mr. Sanchez's also engaged in sexually explicit conduct which involved Miss Collins

physically. For example, Mr. Sanchez:

a. Touched and fondled Miss Collins' breasts;

b. Rubbed his crotch against Miss Collins;

c. Rubbed his hands and other parts of his body against Miss Collins' crotch;

d. Grabbed Miss Collins' buttocks as she worked in the front of the restaurant;

e. Licked Miss Collins' face and neck;

f. Stuck his tongue in Miss Collins' ear;

g. Kissed Miss Collins;

h. Tried to hug Miss Collins;

1.

Snapped towels at Miss Collins' buttocks; and

J.

Engaged in other offensive sexually explicit physical conduct.

26. On one occasion, Mr. Sanchez pinched Miss Collins' arm hard enough that it started

to bleed.

27. Anothertime Mr. Sanchez threw water on her blouse, apparently so that her wet (and

therefore somewhat transparent) white blouse would stick to her breasts.

28. Miss Collins considered Mr. Sanchez's comments and conductto be highly offensive

and derogatory, and objected verbally and/or physically to him when he harassed her.

-8-

_._._ .. __. _ -

29. Tri-Spur knew or should have known ofMr. Sanchez's practice ofsexually harassing
other female employees in the workplace before and while he perpetrated his harassment on Miss

Collins. 30.

Miss Collins, who was 16 years old and employed for the first time, received no

training from Tri-Spur relating to sexual harassment and no instruction regarding its sexual

harassment policy. In fact, when she was hired, Miss Collins was not even afforded a reasonable

opportunity to read its policy, and was never provided a copy of it. Moreover, during Miss Collins'

employment, Tri-Spur never even posted any kind ofa notice to employees in the restaurant in which

she worked, advising them what sexual harassment is, that sexual harassment is against the law and

what they should to do if they were victims of it or aware of it.

31. Even if Miss Collins had received training and instruction on Tri-Spur's sexual harassment policy, it would have been futile for her to complain because Tri-Spur had no serious

intention ofpreventing and/or correcting sexual harassment in its workplace. As alleged below, Tri-

Spur's response to complaints of sexual harassment was to fire the victims.

32. Accordingly, no Tri-Spur employee, including Mr. Sanchez, and its managerial

employees, were, to Miss Collins' knowledge, afforded any effective sexual harassment training

during their employment which could have prevented improper conduct and enabled managers to promptly and effectively respond to sexual harassment if it did occur.

33. It was within this absence of effective training and instruction that Ms. Thompson, one of Miss Collins' managers, witnessed Mr. Sanchez subjecting Miss Collins to obviously

unwelcome and offensive comments and conduct of a sexual nature. For example, on at least one

-9-

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

occasion, Ms. Thompson overheard Mr. Sanchez say "ponocha", which she understood meant "vagina" in Spanish, to Miss Collins. In response, Ms. Thompson told Mr. Sanchez that she did not want to hear him say that again.
34. On another occasion, Miss Collins had to climb up a ladder in the back of the restaurant, and Mr. Sanchez whistled at her. Then, in the process of getting down, he grabbed her buttocks. Although Miss Collins does not know what Ms. Thompson heard or saw, she did hear Ms. Thompson tell Mr. Sanchez, "Hey-leave my girls alone," to which Miss Collins replied, "Yeah."
35. Although Ms. Thompson verbally reprimanded Mr. Sanchez for the first incident, and in response to the second incident told him "Hey-leave my girls alone," she failed to prevent him from continuing to engage in further inappropriate verbal and physical conduct directed towards Miss Collins. On another occasion, Ms. Thompson saw Mr. Sanchez grab Miss Collins' buttocks.
36. Other than as indicated in paragraph 26, Tri-Spur made no further effort to discipline Mr. Sanchez or prevent him from engaging in his frequent barrage of unwelcomed and offensive sexually explicit conduct and comments.
37. Although Miss Collins knew of no effective process at Tri-Spur for stopping Mr. Sanchez's unwelcome and offensive sexual comments and conduct, she complained to Mr. Soto, one ofTri-Spur's Co-Managers and Trainers, while he was at the Sbarro's restaurant where Miss Collins worked. During her conversation with Mr. Soto, Miss Collins complained to him about Mr. Sanchez's sexually offensive physical and verbal conduct.
38. In response, Mr. Soto seemed indifferentto Miss Collins' complaints, but did tell her that he would talk to Mr. Sanchez.
-10-

39. Although Miss Collins does not know whether Mr. Soto ever confronted Mr. Sanchez about her complaints, Mr. Sanchez's behavior was somewhat improved for two or three days afterwards.
40. However, despite Ms. Thompson's knowledge that Miss Collins was being sexually harassed by Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins' complaints to Mr. Soto, and despite the company's knowledge that Mr. Sanchez was sexually harassing Miss Collins and other female employees, TriSpur failed to promptly and effectively respond to and stop Mr. Sanchez's unwelcomed and offensive sexual comments and conduct.
41. Moreover, despite Tri-Spur's knowledge of Mr. Sanchez's on-going harassment, it allowed him to remain employed as Miss Collins' co-worker.
42. Subsequent to Miss Collins' complaints, Mr. Sanchez, while working with her, followed Miss Collins into a walk-in refrigerator, backed her into a corner and began to kiss her and lick her face; he also tried to stick his tongue in her mouth and ear. She tried to push him away, but Mr. Sanchez said, "Come on-I'm fucking horny" and "Let's fuck," and began to rub his erect penis against her crotch and asked her if she could feel it. Miss Collins began crying and continued to try and push him away. Mr. Sanchez picked her up and she kicked him. When a co-worker opened the door to the walk-in refrigerator, Mr. Sanchez released Miss Collins and walked out. The co-worker asked Miss Collins if she was okay and then left. She remained in the refrigerator until she could stop crying. This encounter left her shaking for hours, extremely embarrassed and terrified of Mr. Sanchez.
-11-

43. Later, on another occasion, after her shift was over and the mall had closed for the night, Mr. Sanchez followed Miss Collins to her car. Although he did not try to touch her or speak to her, the fact that he followed her to her car was extremely frightening to Miss Collins.
44. Another incident occurred days later while Miss Collins was washing dishes in the back room at Sbarro's. Mr. Sanchez brought her a stack of dishes to wash, and while she had her back to him, he grabbed her by her ponytail and turned her head around. He put his hands around her neck, and she believed that he would choke her if she tried to scream. Then, he kissed and licked her face, and tried to put his tongue into her mouth. This time, Miss Collins was too afraid to push him away or scream because she thought he would choke her. Mr. Sanchez said, "Look at me bitch. You're a slut. You better watch out or I'll rape you!" He then released her and walked away, leaving Miss Collins terrified.
45. Although Miss Collins continued to complain to Mr. Sanchez about his offensive, unwelcome and sexually derogatory conduct, her complaints to him were futile. Moreover, as Mr. Sanchez continued to engage in further sexually offensive and unwe1comed conduct, it began to become apparent to Miss Collins that Tri-Spur was disinterested in and willing to overlook his actions.
46. Having never received any kind of sexual harassment training, having received virtually no help from Tri-Spur in response to her complaints, and being fearful that she would lose her first job, Miss Collins did not know what to do and was so embarrassed and emotionally paralyzed that she was unable even to tell her parents what had been happening.
47. Finally, one night, Miss Collins was by herself in the back room cleaning up after Sbarro's had closed for the night. After the other employees, including Mr. Sanchez, had left, Mr.
-12-

Sanchez returned to Sbarro's and went into the back of the restaurant where Miss Collins was working, claiming that he had not clocked out and had left his keys. He asked her if she needed help cleaning up. Miss Collins was frightened to be alone with him and told him that she didn't need any help and that she just wanted to hurry up and go home.
48. Without warning, Mr. Sanchez grabbed Miss Collins and again kissed her, licked her face and stuck his tongue in her mouth. He also began to rub his crotch against her. She tried to push him away but he pushed her back, hard against a desk. As a result, she hit her back and fell to the ground. He was immediately on top ofher and said, "I'm going to fuck you, you little bitch-I'm finally going to rape you." He also called her a slut and threatened to kill her if she said anything about what he was doing to her.
49. By this time, Mr. Sanchez had a hold of her bangs, and was pulling her hair hard, throwing her head from side to side and banging it against the floor. Mr. Sanchez made sexual noises, opened her shirt, ripping off a button, tried to pull down her bra, began grabbing her breasts and continued to lick her face and ear. His weight made it difficult for her to breath and she thought she was starting to pass out. His pants were open, and she could feel his erect penis through her clothes and was terrified.
50. Suddenly, there was a loud sound from out in front ofthe restaurant, and Mr. Sanchez got up and left quickly. Miss Collins laid there for what seemed like hours crying, shaking and regaining composure. Humiliated and terrified, she left Sbarro's, found someone whom she thought was a mall security guard and asked him to walk her to her car. He told her that he could not leave the mall, but agreed to watch her from inside while she walked to her car. She drove home in tears,
-13-

not knowing what to do or think. The next morning, still shaken from the attack, she found dried blood on the hairline of her forehead.
51. Mr. Sanchez's assault and attempted rape of Miss Collins left her physically battered and emotionally devastated. It was particularly terrifying and paralyzing to her because Mr. Sanchez had bragged about raping the girl in Mexico.
52. Miss Collins was not scheduled to work the day after this assault. However, when she returned to work a day or so later, Mr. Sanchez told her, "Remember what I said to you." Miss Collins understood that he was referring to his threat to kill her if she told anyone about what had happened. He also stated to her, "Next time I will rape you."
53. Within a few days ofthe attempted rape, Pam Bowen, one ofTri-Spur's owners, met with Ms. Thompson at the Sbarro's where Miss Collins worked. Cynthia Frampton, a Tri-Spur employee from another Sbarro's location, arrived apparently in an effort to talk with Mrs. Bowen about Mr. Sanchez's sexual harassment of her at the location where she worked. Ms. Frampton, Mrs. Bowen and Ms. Thompson met together out in front ofthe restaurant. After the meeting, Mrs. Bowen and Ms. Thompson came into the back where Miss Collins was working. Mrs. Bowen appeared very angry and, in Miss Collins's presence, told Ms. Thompson that "Cindy doesn't know what she is talking about "; "She doesn't know what harassment is "; and "Cindy is just that kind ofgirl." These comments, and Mrs. Bowen's reaction to the complaints about Mr. Sanchez's sexual harassment, upset Miss Collins a great deal. Thereafter, Miss Collins had a conversation with Ms. Frampton and then, after her shift, Miss Collins went home in tears.
-14-

54. When Miss Collins arrived home crying, her mother demanded to know what was going on at work. Miss Collins then told her mother about the attempted rape and the frequent barrage of sexual comments and conduct to which Mr. Sanchez continued to subject her.
55. Mrs. Collins insisted on meeting immediately with Ms. Thompson, so she, together with Mr. Collins and their daughter, Miss Collins, returned to Tri-Spur and met with Ms. Thompson and Mr. Schaeffer in the parking lot outside of Fashion Place Mall, where Tri-Spur's restaurant is located.
56. Mrs. Collins complained to Ms. Thompson and Mr. Schaeffer that her daughter had been sexually harassed and attacked. Mr. Schaeffer's response was to turn around and go back into the mall. Ms. Thompson responded by telling Miss Collins and her parents not to call the authorities because it wouldn't do any good, that Miss Collins should write out a formal complaint and that Ms. Thompson would contact Tri-Spur' s owners, John and Pam Bowen, to tell them about the on-going sexual harassment involving Miss Collins.
57. Ms. Thompson also reported Miss Collins' complaints to John and Pam Bowen. In response, Mrs. Bowen told Ms. Thompson that "Crystle hasn't worked here long enough and is too young to know what harassment is." She did not question Ms. Thompson about what had happened, but did say, in effect, "I know what you do in these situations-You fire the complainer." She then instructed Ms. Thompson to fire Miss Collins. She also stated that they would transfer Mr. Sanchez to another Tri-Spur location. Ms. Thompson protested that firing Miss Collins was an inappropriate way to respond to her complaints of sexual harassment and she refused to fire Miss Collins.
-15-

58. The next day, Miss Collins attempted to give Ms. Thompson her written summary of what had been going on with Mr. Sanchez, but Ms. Thompson told her that she could not accept it. Ms. Thompson seemed upset and threw the letter on the ground, making Miss Collins extremely confused about why she didn't want the letter anymore.
59. Miss Collins tried to work for a few hours that day, but was too emotionally upset to do so. Ms. Thompson told her that Tri-Spur would keep her on the schedule, but that she should go home early. Miss Collins returned to the restaurant and was able to work the next day.
60. However, when the next week's work schedule was posted, Miss Collins found that she was not on it. Ms. Thompson told her that she could come in to work when she was able. Miss Collins told her that she thought she was up to working and asked her to put her back on the schedule. Ms. Thompson assured her that she would.
61. Thereafter, Miss Collins came into the restaurant to see when Ms. Thompson had her scheduled for the following week, but Ms. Thompson was not there. However, Kelly Schaeffer, TriSpur's Co-Manager, told her that her services were no longerneeded and terminated her employment without further explanation. Shortly thereafter, Tri-Spur also fired Ms. Thompson and Ms. Frampton.
62. Upon information and belief, Mr. Sanchez, Mr. Soto and Mr. Schaeffer remain employed by Tri-Spur.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Violation of Title VII-Sexual Harassment) 63. Plaintiffincorporates herein the allegations contained in paragraphs I through 52 of this Complaint.
-16-

64. The sexually explicit conduct and comments ofMr. Sanchez, as alleged herein, were unwelcome, pervasive, frequent, humiliating, severe and changed the terms and conditions of her employment, and were both subjectively offensive to Miss Collins and objectively offensive to the average reasonable person.
65. Tri-Spur knew or should have known of Mr. Sanchez's sexual harassment of Miss Collins and other employees, and despite that knowledge, failed to take prompt and effective remedial action.
66. Tri-Spur also failed to effectively train Mr. Sanchez to refrain from sexual harassment, failed to implement and enforce a fair and effective sexual harassment policy and complaint procedure, and failed to act reasonably to prevent and promptly correct the sexual harassment of Miss Collins.
67. Not only did Tri-Spur fail to exercise reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct Mr. Sanchez's sexually harassing behavior, it intentionally condoned, furthered and ratified his conduct as its own, as alleged more fully herein.
68. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid violations of her rights under Title VII, Miss Collins was deprived of a work place free from a sexually hostile environment, causing her to sustain a loss of income and benefits, incur expenses and suffer emotional, mental and physical injury, for which Tri-Spur is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks damages as hereinafter set forth. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violation of Title VII-Retaliation) 69. Plaintiffincorporates herein the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 58 of this Complaint.
-17-

70. Miss Collins' objections to being subjected to sexual harassment and her complaints to Tri-Spur's managers, as alleged herein, constituted protected opposition to unlawful discrimination and resulted in retaliatory discrimination against her by Tri-Spur.
71. As the result of Tri-Spur's retaliation, Miss Collins suffered adverse employment action subsequent to and contemporaneous with engaging in protected activity.
72. As a direct and proximate result of the violations of her rights under Title VII, Miss Collins was subjected to unlawful retaliatory discrimination, the termination of her employment, a loss of income and benefits, and emotional, mental and physical injury, for which Tri-Spur is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks damages as hereinafter set forth. DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
73. If this Court finds that Tri-Spur has intentionally engaged in unlawful employment practices as alleged herein, Miss Collins is entitled to declaratory relief or an order of the Court enjoining Tri-Spur from engaging in unlawful employment practices, together with such affirmative relief as may be appropriate.
PUNITIVE DAMAGES Tri-Spur's violations of Title VII were with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Miss Collins for which she is entitled to punitive damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §198Ia(b)(I).
REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS Miss Collins has had to retain counsel and therefore is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(k).
-18-

DEMAND FOR A JURY TRIAL Miss Collins is entitled to, and hereby demands, ajury pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1981a et seq.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Miss Collins prays for judgment against Tri-Spur as follows:
I. For actual, special, compensatory and punitive damages against in amounts to be
awarded at trial, together with declaratory and injunctive relief; 2. For Plaintiff's costs in this Action, including reasonable attorneys' fees; and 3. For prejudgment interest on items of actual and special damage, together with such
other and further relief as the Court deems just.
DATED this / gt'-' day of April, 2001.
HOOLE & KING, L.C.
RogerH. Heather Morrison Attorney for Plaintiffin Intervention, Crystle Collins
-19-

VERIFICATION

STATE OF UTAH

)

:ss

COUNTY OF SALT LAKE )

Crystle Collins, having been duly sworn upon oath, deposes and states as follows:

I. I am the Plaintiff in Intervention in this Action.

2. I have read this Verified Complaint in Intervention.

3. As to the paragraphs containing factual information concerning myself, I have first-

hand information regarding the same and verify that they are correct to the best of my knowledge

and belief.

4. As to the paragraphs bearing on matters as to which I do not have first-hand

information, legal theories, or legal claims, I verify only that this is my Verified Complaint in

Intervention.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me this/if day of April, 2001.
NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF UTAH
My Commission Expi.. FlbrulD" 2 2002
T"'IIA LEA BRrllhlll
1601 SigQlfd Dnve Salt l ... City. Utah ~106
-20-

Exhibits/ Attachments to this document have not been
scanned.
Please see the case file.

 
 C. Emanuel Smith Ralph E. Chamness (Bar No. 6511) Sally C. Shanley Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-9688 Telephone: (602) 640-5025 Attorneys for Plaintiff

FILED
CLEi"." S DISTRICT COURT
25 SEP 0I AM II: ~ It
DISTRICT OF UT AH

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff, vs.
TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., TRI-SPUR L.L.C. and BERKLEY CORPORATION, dha SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,
Defendants.

CRYSTLE COLLINS,
Plaintiff in Intervention, vs.
TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., a.k.a. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENTS, INC., a.k.a. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, d.h.a. SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY; and TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT L.L.C., a.k.a. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT II L.L.C., d.h.a. SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY; and BERKLEY CORPORATION, d.h.a. SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY; and DOES I THROUGH V, d.h.a. SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,

AMENDED COMPLAINT
Civil No. 2:00CVOO774B
Judge Dee Benson Magistrate Judge David O. Nuffer

1
9/

NATURE OF THE ACTION
This is an action pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981a against Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., Tri-Spur L.L.C. and Berkley Corporation doing business as Sbarro's Italian Eatery, seeking redress for unlawful sexual discrimination, sexual harassment and retaliation against a class of women. Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission") contends that Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., Tri-Spur L.L.C. and Berkley Corporation doing business as Sbarro's Italian Eatery have discriminated against and continue to discriminate against women on the basis of their gender by subjecting them to unlawful sexual discrimination and sexual harassment. The Commission further contends that Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., Tri-Spur L.L.C. and Berkley Corporation doing business as Sbarro's Italian Eatery unlawfully retaliated against women who complained of sexual harassment.
JURISDICTION. VENUE AND PARTIES 1. This Court's jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337,
1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to sections 706(0(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(t)(I) and (3) and section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a. The Commission is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title VII and is expressly authorized to bring this action by 42 U.S.C. § 2000e5(t)(1) and (3).
2. Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., Tri-Spur L.L.C. and Berkley Corporation
2

doing business as Sbarro's Italian Eatery (collectively "Tri-Spur" or "defendants") operate Italian restaurants which are located in Utah and have, at all relevant times, employed a sufficient number of employees to subject them to jurisdiction under Title VII. At all relevant times, defendants have continuously been employers engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b), (g) and (h). Defendants conduct business in Utah through various names, including but not limited to Sbarro's Italian Eatery, Orange Julius and/or Dairy Queen. All of the Defendants identified above, together with Drue Bowen Corporation and Jerome Bowen Enterprises, Inc., have interrelated operations, headquartered at 116 South Center, Rexburg, Idaho, with centralized control over labor relations, common management and common financial control. Because of the integration of their management and operations, the Defendants are a single employer for purposes of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.
3. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Crystle Collins, Cindy Harris and Christine Byrne (collectively "charging parties"), filed charges of discrimination with the Commission alleging that Defendants violated Title VII by subjecting them to sexual harassment or gender based discrimination and by retaliating against them when they complained about the sexual harassment.
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 4. Since at least August, 1997, Tri-Spur has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Utah locations in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII, 42 U .S.C. § 2000e2(a), including subjecting charging parties and a class of women to a hostile work enviromnent
3

due to sexual harassment and gender based harassment, failing to take immediate and
appropriate action to correct the hostile work environment and terminating charging parties and
a class of women when they complained about the sexual harassment.
5. During their employment by Tri-Spur, charging parties and a class of female
employees were subjected to unwelcome sexual harassment. Such harassment included:
a). Being subjected to unwelcome and inappropriate sexual comments including comments concerning sexual conquests, sexual organs and comments concerning female bodies; and, b). Being subjected to unwelcome and inappropriate touching.
6. Despite being told of the sexual harassment, Tri-Spur failed to take any
appropriate action.
7. Since at least August, 1997, Tri-Spur has engaged in unlawful retaliatory
practices against charging parties and a class of female employees at its Utah locations in
violation of Section 704(a) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a), including, but not limited to,
withholding assistance to women performing their jobs, reducing the hours of individuals who
complained of sexual harassment and terminating those who complained of sexual harassment.
Such retaliation included:
a). Ordering a female manager who complained about the sexual harassment of another female employee to reduce the number of hours the female employee could work;
b). Telling a woman who complained of sexual harassment that the "problem" of her complaints of sexual harassment had been "solved" by her termination;
c). Ordering a female manager to terminate a female employee who had been sexually assaulted and when the manager refused to do so, terminating the complaining woman and the manager; and,
d). Telling a woman that she was "too young" to know what
4

sexual harassment was. 8. Since at least August, 1997, Tri-Spur has engaged in a pattern and practice of resistance to the full employment of rights secured by Title VII. The patter or practice is of such a nature that it is intended to deny employees the full exercise of their Title VII rights because of sex, in violation of Section 707 of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-6. 9. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraphs four (4) through eight (8) above has been to deprive charging parties and a class of females of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affected their status as employees because of their sex and in retaliation for opposing practices made unlawful by Title VII. 10. The unlawful employment practices outlined above were intentional. 11. Tri-Spur engaged in the unlawful employment practices outlined above in reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of the charging parties and a class of females.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants, their officers, successors,
assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from engaging in discrimination on the basis of sex or retaliation. B. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendants, their officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in discrimination on the basis of sex or retaliation. C. Order Defendants to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs
5

which provide equal employment opportunities for females and which eradicate the effects of their past and present unlawful employment practices. D. Order Defendants to make whole charging parties and a class of similarly situated females by providing appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of their unlawful employment practices. E. Order Defendants to make whole charging parties and a class of similarly situated females by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described above in amounts to be determined at trial. F. Order Defendants to make whole charging parties and a class of similarly situated females by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of above including emotional pain, suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation in amounts to be determined at trial. G. Order Defendants to pay punitive damages for their malicious and/or reckless disregard to the federally protected rights of the charging parties and other similarly situated females described above, in amounts to be determined at trial. H. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest. I. Award the Commission its costs of this action.
6

JURy DEMAND The Commission respectfully requests a trial by jury on all appropriate Claims for Relief set forth in this Complaint.
11 DATED this fay of September, 2001.
Respectfully submitted, GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Associate General Counsel EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1801 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20507
(!.~~
C. EMANUEL SMITH rney
RALPH E. CHAMNESS SALLY C. SHANLEY Trial Attorneys EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Phoenix District Office 3300 N. Central Ave., Suite 690 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 (602) 640-5025 Attorneys for Plaintiff
7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
<J./ I certify that on thisJi day of September, 2001, a copy of Plaintiff EEOC's Amended Complaint was mailed, first class postage pre-paid, to:
Mary Anne Q. Wood Kathryn Ogden Balmforth WOOD CRAPO, L.L.C.
500 East Gate Tower 60 East South Temple Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Attorneys for Defendants
and Roger Hoole Heather E. Morrison Hoole & King 4276 S. Highland Dr. Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 Attorneys for Plaintiff in Intervention
~a.~
Linda A. Grierson Legal Technician
8

 
 •
WOOD CRAPO LLC Mary Anne Q. Wood #3539 Kathryn Ogden Balmforth #5659 500 Eagle Gate Tower 60 East South Temple Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Telephone (801) 366-6060
Attorneys for Defendant

FILED

'I ('

1·,'r1-"'''~ '-~.h ,I

COURT

IN THO: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COliRT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., dba SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,
Defendant.

) ) ORDER ON DISCOVERY ISSUES ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil No. 2:00CV00774B
Magistrate Judge David Nuffer ) )

On Wednesday. September 19,2001, at 5:00 p.m., a hearing was held pursuant to this Court's Order Granting E>pedited Hearing, dated September 17,2001.
Ralph Chamne,s and Sally Shanley appeared, by telephone, for Plaintiff EEOC. Roger Hoole and Heather Morrison appeared for Plaintiff in Intervention Crystle Collins. Mary Anne Wood and Kathryn Balmforth appeared for Defendant Tri-Spur Investments, Inc., and for proposed Defendants Tri-Spur Investments II, LLC., and Berkley Corporation.

\\}J

•
Although the hearing was scheduled pursuant to Tri-Spur's ex parte request for an expedited hearing on it Motior. for Leave to Take Additional Depositions, the parties were informed that the Court would also hear argument on Tri-Spur's pending Motion for Mental Examination, Tri-Spur's Motion for Extension of Time for Filing Defendants' Expert Reports, and Crystle Collins' Motion fc'r Extension of Time to Conduct Discovery. In addition, the parties were ordered to prepare a summary of all pending discovery issues, whether the subject of a motion or not, and the positi)n of each party on each issue.
Having heard t:1e arguments of counsel, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1. Tri-Spur's Motion for Leave to Take Additional Depositions is GRANTED, in part, as follo'Ws. Tri-Spur may take all the depositions it has currently noticed, and may take, in addition, the depositions of two ofCrystle Collins' health care providers who have not been previously deposed. The deposition of Charles RahiE may be taken in Phoenix at a time mutually convenient to the parties. If Felipe Lisceno or Jose Gonzales Soto are located, even after discovery has closed on October 5, 2001, their depositions may be taken by any party. If any party locates a current address or telephone number for either Mr. Lisceno or Mr. Gonzales Soto, it shall be provided to the other parties, forthwith.
2. Tri-Spur's Motion for Mental Examination under Rule 35 is GRANTED. Crystle Collins shall present herself for examination by Tri-Spur's (:xperts as set forth in the Motion, as soon as feasible. Ms. Collins' counsel shall not be permitted to attend.
2

In granting this Motion, the Court expressly disclaims any ruling on the admissibility of the results of th~ psychological tests administered by Tri-Spur's psychological expert.
3. Tri-Spur's Motion for Extension of Time for Filing of Defendant's Expert Reports is GRANTED. Defendant's Expert Report shall be submitted within 20 days after Tri-Spur's second expert examiaes Ms. Collins. Depositions of Defendant's experts shall be taken within 30 days of the submission of their reports. Plaintiffs shall submit their rebuttal reports, if any, within 20 days cfthe filing of Defendant's expert reports. Depositions of Plaintiffs' experts, if any, shall be taken within 30 days of the submission of Plaintiffs' rebuttal expert reports.
4. Plaintiff in Intervention Crystle Collins' Motion for Extension of Time to conduct discovery on issues related to new parties is GRANTED, in part, as follows. Depositions of Tri-Spur Investments II, L.L.C. and Berkley Corporation may be taken pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6). Ecch of those entities shall designate its representative, and provide the Plaintiffs with the current ajdresses of those representatives forthwith. The scope of the 30(b)(6) depositions shall be limited to those topics set forth in the respective deposition notices previously served.
5. Tri-Spur' s Motion for Protective Order, filed en September 18, 200 I, regarding the 30(b)(6) depositiJns of Tri-Spur L.L.C. and Berkley Corporation is GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part, as follows. While the depositions ofTri-Spur Investments II, L.L.C. and Berkley Corporation may proceed as ordered above, the L.L.C. will be deposed in Rexburg, Idaho.
3

Counsel has indicated that Berkley Bowen will be designated as tbe representative of Berkley Corp. The deposition of Berkley Corporation will be taken in New York City, where Berkley Bowen resides.
6. With respect to additional issues upon which no motion has been filed, the Court rules as follows. Tri-Spu shall provide the Plaintiffs with the home addresses of Janet Webster and Walter Johnston, 1orthv/ith.
DATED this J~OfOctober, 2001.
BY THE COURT:
Magistrate Judge David O. NufTer United States District Court
APPROVED AS TO FORM: EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Ralph E. Chamness Sally C. Shanley Attorneys for Plaintiff
4

ce Un:Lted States District Court.
for the District of Utah October 26, 2001
* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLER.K * *
Re: 2:00-cv-00774
True and correct copies 0'= the attached were either' mailed or faxed by the clerk to the following:
Ralph E. Chamness, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OJ'FICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 JFAX 8,602,6405009
Richard R Truj i 110.. Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848
Ms. Car1ie Christensen, Esq. US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
JFAX 9,5245985
Sally Shanley, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012
Ms. Mary Anne Q. Wood, Esq. WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE BTE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 JFAX 9,3666061
Mr. Mark Dalton Dunn, Esq. KIDMAN & ASSOC 4021 S 700 E STE 420 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84107
Mr. Roger H. Hoole, Esq. HOOLE & KING LC 4276 HIGHLAND DR

SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84124 JFAX 9,2727557

 
 FIlED
IN THE UNITED STATES DIsTRrcf!~dlfRTIS TRICr COUl!T
DISTRICT OF UTAH - CENTRAL Df,hirW2 AM 9: 46

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY and TRISPUR INVESTMENTS, INC.,
Defendants.

BY; O"'E"'pC:-l:7'n""yC:-:;c:L7-:E:""R"K7:- -
ORDER
Case No. 2:00-CV-774B

CRYSTLE COLLINS, Plaintiff in Intervention
vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., et. al.
Defendants

Before the Court is plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's ("EEOC") motion to strike certain of defendants' facts in support of defendants' motion for summary judgment. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) and Utah Local Rule 56-I, EEOC moves the Court to strike certain facts because they are inadmissible, argumentative, lack foundation, unsupported

by evidence, irrelevant, or offered to prejudice the Court. Plaintiff in intervention, Crystal Collins, joins EEOC in the present motion.
Defendants respond that the Rules of Civil Procedure do not allow plaintiff to challenge defendants' motion for summary judgment by filing a motion to strike. Specifically, defendants contend that motions to strike are governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) and apply only to pleadings. Defendants further argue that a motion for summary judgment is not a pleading for purposes of a motion to strike. Defendants state that plaintiffs quarrel with the facts should have been dealt with in the bcginning portions of its opposition memorandum1
Defendants are correct that Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) only applies to pleadings. Defendants are also correct that summary judgment motions are not pleadings for the purpose of the rule. Nevertheless, plaintiff did not file the present motion pursuant to rule 12(f) but rather filed the motion to strike pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e) and Utah Local Rule 56-1. Rule 56(e) requires that evidence supporting and opposing summary judgment must set forth facts as would be admissible in evidence. Also, it is well settled that "[a]n affidavit that does not measure up to the standards of rule 56(e) is subject to a motion to strike." Noblett v. General Elec. Credit Corp., 400 F.2d 442, 445 (10th Cir. 1968). Therefore, plaintiffs motion to strike under rule 56(e) is procedurally appropriate.
The Court now turns to the merits of the present motion. Plaintiff first argues that a number of defendants' facts should be stricken because they contain improper argument. Specifically, plaintiff contends that the facts are improper because they (1) inappropriately
lDefendants do not address the merits of plaintiff's motion to strike but apparently rest on their procedural argument.
2

characterize the testimony of plaintiffs witnesses, (2) contain legal conclusions, (3) challenge the credibility of non-movant witnesses or (4) are just plain argument. The Court finds plaintiffs first argument that defendants mischaracterize witness testimony to be largely without merit. The Court has reviewed the cited record and finds that the record speaks for itself Accordingly, the motion is denied in this regard,
The Court does find, however, that several of defendants' facts contain inappropriate legal conclusions, Therefore, the following portions of defendants' facts will be stricken and will not be considered by the Court: Paragraph 16 "That policy goes beyond what the law requires, as it forbids even 'sexual discussion' which does not arise to the level of harassment"; Paragraph 19 "Not all of those allegations, even if true, would rise to the level of sexual harassment"; Paragraph 32 "There may be enough evidence that no reasonable jury could believe Ms. Collins' version of events, and the Court could resolve the question of whether there was any 'attack,' or any other harassment, at the workplace on summary judgment. But it is not necessary for the Court to do so, because of the undisputed facts regarding Ms. Collins' reporting of the events,
and Tri-Spur's actions thereafter"; Paragraphs 104, 171, and 174 "That [or this1dispute is
immaterial. " Regarding facts that allegedly "challenge the credibility of non-movant witnesses" or "are
just plain argument," the Court finds plaintiffs contentions without merit and therefore denies the same. Plaintiff had the opportunity to challenge these facts in its memorandum in opposition to summary judgment.
Plaintiffs next argument is that several of defendants' facts should be stricken because they are unsupported by admissible evidence. Specifically, plaintiff contends that the facts are
3

•
(1) unsupported by the cited record, (2) lack any citation to the record, (3) reflect a lack of personal knowledge, (4) lack foundation, or (5) are hearsay. The Court finds plaintiff's arguments without merit. The facts cited by defendants do have some basis in the cited record and those facts without citation are simply placed in the fact section by way of explanation. The Court further finds that the cited facts do not reflect a lack of personal knowledge of the witness, do not lack foundation, and are not inadmissible hearsay. As previously discussed, plaintiff has had ample opportunity to address these facts in its opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment and has taken advantage of that opportunity.
Plaintiff's final argument is that defendants have improperly placed facts before the Court that are irrelevant. Fed. R. Evid. 401 defines relevant evidence as "evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence." The Court finds that the background information contained in paragraphs 1-13 of defendants' motion is relevant to the case. Furthermore, the Court finds relevant the facts contained in paragraphs 19, 24, 29, 87, 143, and 152. The Court finds irrelevant, however, the facts contained in paragraph 158 and in footnotes 12 and 14. Accordingly, these facts will be stricken and will not be considered by the Court in analyzing the motion for summary judgment.
CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, plaintiff's motion to strike certain of defendants' facts in support of defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART - granted with respect to those facts previously discussed that are irrelevant or contain inappropriate legal conclusion and denied as to the remaining facts. IT IS SO ORDERED.
4

~y DATED this

of February, 2002.

r GLL.) _~>Ul 1.-----~

Dee enson United States District Judge

5

alt United States District Court
for the District of Utah February 8, 2002
* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLERK * *
Re: 2:00-cv-00774

True and correct copies of the attached were either mailed or faxed by the clerk to the following:

Ralph E. Chamness, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 JFAX 8,602,6405009

Ms. Carlie Christensen, Esq. US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

JFAX 9,5245985

Ms. Mary Anne Q. Wood, Esq. WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 JFAX 9,3666061

Mr. Mark Dalton Dunn, Esq. KIDMAN & ASSOC 4021 S 700 E STE 420 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84107

Mr. Roger H. Hoole, HOOLE & KING LC 4276 HIGHLAND DR SALT LAKE CITY, UT JFAX 9,2727557

Esq. 84124

 
 , ,

•

•

FILED :LFP~" u.s. DISTRICT COURT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTS MAR 02 AM 10: 00

DISTRICT OF UTAH - CENTRAL DIVISIOffis TR leT

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY and TRISPUR INVESTMENTS, INC.,
Defendants.

DEP
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER Case No. 2:00-CV-774B

CRYSTLE COLLINS, Plaintiff in Intervention
vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., et. at.
Defendants

I. INTRODUCTION Before the Court are defendants Tri-Spur Investment II, LLC's (the "LLC") and Berkley Corporation's ("Berkley") motion to dismiss plaintiff Crystle Collins' ("Collins") verified

. .

•

•

This case stems from alleged violations of Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.c. §

2000 et seq. Fonner Tri-Spur Investment Company ("Tri-Spur") employees, Collins, Cindy

Harris and Christine Byrne (the "charging parties") filed charges of discrimination with the

EEOC alleging that Tri-Spur violated Title VII by subjecting them to sexual harassment or

gender based discrimination and by retaliating against them when they complained about sexual

harassment.

The EEOC filed a complaint on behalf of the charging parties and a class of women and

Collins filed a complaint in intervention. Both original complaints named only Tri-Spur as the

defendant. Subsequently, however, both the EEOC and Collins amended their complaints and

added the LLC and Berkley as additional defendants - alleging that all of the defendants are a

single employer pursuant to Title VII. In the present motions, the LLC and Berkley assert that

they are not cmployers for purposcs of Titlc VII and urge thc Court to dismiss them from the

case for lack ofjurisdiction. Having considered the parties' briefs, oral arguments, and the

relevant law, the Court issues the following memorandum opinion and order.

II. BACKGROUND

Tri-Spur owns various restaurant franchises, including the Sbarro's restaurant at the

Fashion Place Mall ("Fashion Place Sbarro's"). Tri-Spur also operates under a management

contract with Berkley whereby Tri-Spur manages the day-to-day operations of a Sbarro's

restaurant located in the ZCMI mall and owned by Berkley ("ZCMI Sbarro's"). Tri-Spur is

currently in the process of transferring the Fashion Place Sbarro's into the LLC.

Collins was employed by Tri-Spur and worked at the Fashion Place Sbarro's. She alleges

that during the summer of 1997, while she worked at the Fashion Place Sbarro' s, she was
2

. .

•

•

sexually harassed by fellow Tri-Spur employee, Felipe Sanchez. There is some evidence that Sanchez also worked for Berkley at the ZCMI Sbarro's. Nevertheless, Collins was never employed or supervised by any entity other than Tri-Spur. Likewise, the charging parties in the EEOC's case never had an employment relationship with either Berkley or the LLC. They were all Tri-Spur employees and worked in restaurants owned by Tri-Spur.
III. DISCUSSION In support of their motion, the LLC and Berkley argue that because neither entity had any kind of employment relationship with Collins or the charging parties, they are not employers for purposes of Title VII. I Collins and the EEOC respond that, under the so-called "singleemployer" test, Tri-Spur, Berkley and the LLC should be considered a single employer because the operation, management, and ownership of all three entities are so intertwined. The EEOC further argues that Berkley is a proper defendant because one of the class members, Cynthia Fletcher Frampton, was employed by both Berkley and Tri-Spur and was harassed at the ZCMI

Sbarro's by a person who was also employed by both Berkley and Tri-Spur. The Court finds that no facts exist in this case that would support the application of the
"single-employer test." The Tenth Circuit has enunciated a test to determine whether related companies constitute a single employer - focusing on factors such as interrelation of operations, centralized control over labor relation, common management, and common ownership or financial control. See Worrell v. Henry, 219 F.3d 1197, 1212 n. 3 (lOth Cir. 2000). Nevertheless,

I Under Title VII, an "employer"is a person engaged in an industry affecting commerce who has fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b).
3

•

•

there is no evidence that those factors apply to Berkley or the LLC to support retaining them as

defendants in this action. An additional factual predicate, such as a showing that Berkley or the

LLC exercised some amount of control over the labor relations ofTri-Spur, would be needed to

support Collins' and the EEOC's arguments. That showing has not been made.2

Additionally, the Court finds no merit in the EEOC's contention that the alleged

harassment of Ms. Framptonjustifies retaining Berkley as a defendant. Berkley was never on

notice that such a claim would be made. In fact, Ms. Frampton has never filed a sexual

harassment charge against Berkley nor was any attempt ofconciliation made on the part ofthe

EEOC or Ms. Frampton. In short, an insinuation, ferreted out in a deposition, that a class

member suffered sexual harassment, is not a sufficient reason to warrant the denial of the present

motions - especially when that class member filed no formal charges.

Collins and the EEOC lastly argue that the LLC is a proper defendant under some kind of

successor liability theory. The Court finds that the facts of this case are insufficient to warrant

the application of any successor liability test. There is no indication that the predecessor

corporation, Tri-Spur, will not be able to provide relief in this case. Furthermore, the current

status ofTri-Spur's asset transfer is unclear. Therefore, the Court refuses to exercise its

discretion at this time and declines to impose successor liability theory.

2It is interesting to note that Tri-Spur employs more than 15 individuals, making it an "employer" for porpo>c> of Title VII. Thus, the only apparent reason for retaining Berkley and the LLC - other than having two additional defendants in the lawsuit - would be to increase the damage amounts available to the plaintiffs. See 42 U.S.C. § 198Ia(b)(3) (capping damages based on the number of employees). In anticipation of this very issue, Tri-Spur offered to stipulate that it employed more than 100 individuals, thereby allowing plaintiffs a higher damage cap than might have otherwise been available.
4

•

•

•

IV. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, as well as the reasons set forth in defendants' briefs,
defendants' motion is GRANTED - dismissing Berkley and the LLC from this action.
DATED this~-fo\..f. March, 2002.

United States District Judge

5

alp United States District Court
for the District of Utah March 12, 2002
* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLERK * *
Re: 2:00-cv-00774
True and correct copies of the attached were either mailed or faxed by the clerk to the following:
Ralph E. Chamness, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 JFAX 8,602,6405009
Mary Jo O'Neill, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848
Ms. Car1ie Christensen, Esq. US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
,
JFAX 9,5245985
Sandra J. Padegimas, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012 (602)*
Ms. Mary Anne Q. Wood, Esq. WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 JFAX 9,3666061
Mr. Mark Dalton Dunn, Esq. KIDMAN &: ASSOC 4021 S 700 E STE 420 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84107
Mr. Roger H. Hoole, Esq. HOOLE &: KING LC

4276 HIGHLAND DR
SALT LAKE CITY. UT 84124
JFAX 9.2727557

 
 ; ,,,"

FILED
~:S~PI'=T COURT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT22 APR 02 AH 10: ,7

DISTRICT OF liTAH - CENTRAL DIVISIOND 1ST RIC T F UTA H

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSIOK,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY and TRISPUR INVESTMENTS, INC'.,
Defendants.

ORDER Case No. 2:00-CV-774B

CRYSTLE COLLINS, Plaintiff in Intervention
vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC'., et. al.
Defendants

Before the Com1 is plaintiff in intervention Crystle Collins' motion for cntry oC linal judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). On March 7, 2002, the Court granted defendants Berkley Corporation, d.b.a. Sbarro's Italian Eatery ("Berkley") and Tri-Spur Investment LL.C's (Hthe L.L.C'.") motion to dismiss Collins' verified amended complaint in intervention. Collins claims against the other defendants in this ease still remain. Collins argues that if she is forced to

wait until after trial of the remaining case to appeal the Court's dismissal of the above-mentioned

defendants, any successful appeal would result in retrial ofthe entire case. Collins asserts that

having to try the case twice would cause great hardship. Collins also contends that strategic

reasons justify the granting of the present motion.

Defendants oppose the motion. Defendants correctly notc that "trial courts should be

reluctant to enter Rule 54(b) orders since the purpose of this rule is a limited one: to provide a

recourse for litigants when dismissal of less than all their claims will create undue hardships."

Oklahoma Turnpike Auth. v. Bruner, 259 FJd 1236, 1242 (lOLh Cir. 2001). Defendants assert

that Collins has made no showing of undue hardship or possible injustice necessary for

certification under rule 54(b). Defendants further contend that any liability on the part of the

dismissed defendants is contingent on a finding that the remaining defendants are liahle for

Collins' claims. Thus, defendants state that if no liability is found, then the claims against the

dismissed defendants are moot. Finally, defendants contend that granting the present Illation

would further delay trial of the pending case, causing prejudice to thc rcmaining defendants.

The Court finds defendants' arguments compelling. This is not a case wherc the hardship

created by waiting to appeal the dismissal of Berkley and the L.L.c. creates undue hardship or

prejudice justifying certification under rule 54(b). Further, the Court finds that such certification

would prejudice defendants in delaying trial of the remaining ease and therefore would not he in

the interests orjudicial economy. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Crystle Collins' motion for

entry of final judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). IT IS SO ORDERED.

~~f DATED this

April, 2002.

Deenetlson United States District Judge

2

ce United States District Court
for the District of Utah April 22, 2002
* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLERK * *
Re: 2:00-cv-00774
True and correct copies of the attached were either mailed or faxed by the clerk to the following:
Ralph E. Chamness, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 JFAX 8,602,6405009
Mary Jo O'Neill, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848
Ms. Carlie Christensen, Esq. US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
JFAX 9,5245985
Ms. Mary Anne Q. Wood, Esq. WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 JFAX 9,3666061
Mr. Mark Dalton Dunn, Esq. KIDMAN & ASSOC 4021 S 700 E STE 420 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84107
Mr. Roger H. Hoole, Esq. HOOLE & KING LC 4276 HIGHLAND DR SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84124 JFAX 9,2727557

 
 FIUD

1 ,,;'\, I' c, r!STRICT COURT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF UTAH - CENTRAL DIVISION 13 HAY 02 AH 10: 22

r""" 01<; T 1:11 ('

IT."

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs,

ORDER Case No. 2:00-CV-774B

TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC" dba SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,

Defendants.

CRYSTLE COLLINS, Plaintiff in Intervention
vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC" et. al.
Defendants
Before the Court is defendant Tri-Spur Investment Co. Inc.'s ("Tri-Spur") motion for partial reconsideration of order on summary judgment wherein Tri-Spur asks this Court to reconsider its ruling denying summary judgment as to Crystle Collins' claims. Plaintiffs oppose the present motion.
Tri-Spur argues that there is no evidence that it was on notice of severe and pervasive sexual harassment prior to the August 141h date when Collins reported an alleged assault upon her

by fellow employee, Felipe Liscano. Tri-Spur further argues that even ifit was on notice, its

response to Liscano's actions was entirely reasonable. As plaintiffs point out, Tri-Spur's

arguments in the present motion are identical to the arguments briefed and argued orally in the

motion for summary judgment. The Court has ruled on that motion and nothing stated in Tri-

Spur's motion to reconsider persuades the Court to change that ruling. Accordingly, Tri-Spur's

motion for partial reconsideration of order on summary judgment is DENIED. IT IS SO

ORDERED.
DATED this ~4ay of'::::;/2602.

'h~~ !)~~"- '-~
Deeiinson United States District Judge

2

jmo United States District Court
for the District of Utah May 13, 2002
* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLERK * *
Re: 2:00-cv-00774

True and correct copies of the attached were either mailed or faxed by the clerk to the following:

Ralph E. Chamness, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 JFAX 8,602,6405009

Mary Jo O'Neill, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE NORWEST TOWER 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848

Ms. Carlie Christensen, Esq. US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

JFAX 9,5245985

Ms. Mary Anne Q. Wood, Esq. WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 JFAX 9,3666061

Mr. Mark Dalton Dunn, Esq. KIDMAN & ASSOC 4021 S 700 E STE 420 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84107

Mr. Roger H. Hoole, HOOLE & KING LC 4276 HIGHLAND DR SALT LAKE CITY, UT JFAX 9,2727557

Esq. 84124

 
 FIL ED
18 NOV 03 PH 2: ?6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DIS H: leT UF UT ;\ H FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISI!~iN[lEI' I 'T-:-;- CI r-;;X-

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Plaintiff, vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., dba SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,
Defendant.
CRYSTLE COLLINS, Plaintiff in Intervention,
vs_
TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., et al.,
Defendants in Intervention.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO COMPEL
Case No: 2:00 CV 774 DB District Judge Dee Benson Magistrate Judge David Nuffer

Defendant has moved to compel production of documents I from Plaintiff. Interestingly, Defendant seeks copies of documents Plaintiff made from Defendant's original documents. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff took those originals when Plaintiff investigated this claim, before suit was filed, copied the originals, Bates-stamped the copies, and then returned only some of the

2003.

originals to Defendant.2 Plaintiff resists the motion, claiming that Defendant has all the originals, and that there is no legal authority to require Plaintiff to make the production. Plaintiff says that there is no request for production for these items and the fact that Plaintiff listed the Batesstamped documents on Plaintiffs initial disclosures does not obligate Plaintiff to produce them.3
Defendant replies that the Plaintiff should be ordered to produce the Bates-stamped documents because Plaintiff listed them in Plaintiffs First Supplement to Initial Disclosures: but failed to state their location or provide copies, as the rule alternatively requires.'
To enable the resolution of the dispute about loss of documents and completeness of the exhibits, this motion should be granted. Comparing the copies and originals is something that needs to be done. This is, however, a case in which there is substantial justification for the prior refusal of the EEOC to produce the copies, so an award of expenses is not appropriate.6
This case is set for an omnibus hearing on pre-trial motions on December 10, 2003, before the district judge and set for trial in early February 2004. The comparison should happen sooner rather than later.

2

[Defendant's] Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Production of

Documents, docket no. 373, filed September 23,2003.

Plaintiff EEOC's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Compel Production of Documents ("EEOC's Opposition"), docket no. 409, filed October 9,2003.

4

Attached as Exhibit B to the Affidavit of Sandra J. Padegimas, which is Exhibit I

to the EEOC's Opposition.

[Defendant's] Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion to Compel Production of Documents, docket no. 412, filed October 22,2003. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(l)(B).

6

Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(c)(l) and (b)(2) and compare 37(a)(4)(A).

-2-

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

•
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to compel production of documents7 is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall produce the Bates-stamped copies for inspection at the hearing December 10, 2003, or at an alternative time and place mutually agreed by the parties. If the production is made at the time of the hearing, Defendant shall provide staff to enable comparison of the originals and Bates-stamped copies during the hearing, without requiring the time of counsel who are participating in the hearing. Whenever the production and inspection is made, cost of copies shall be borne by Defendant.
November 18,2003. BY THE COURT:
David Nuffer U.S. Magistrate Judge

7

Docket no. 372, filed September 23, 2003.

·3-

ce United States District Court
for the District of Utah November 19, 2003
* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLERK * *
Re: 2:00-cv-00774
True and correct copies of the attached were either mailed, faxed or e-mailed by the clerk to the following:
Ms. Lois A. Baar, Esq. JANOVE BAAR ASSOC 9 EXCHANGE PL STE 1112 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 EMAIL
Ms. Mary Anne Q. Wood, Esq. WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 EMAIL
Mr. Mark Dalton Dunn, Esq. VICTORIA K KIDMAN & ASSOCIATES 111 E BROADWAY STE 800 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111
Mr. Roger H. Hoole, Esq. HOOLE & KING LC 4276 HIGHLAND DR SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84124 JFAX 9,2727557
Ms. Car1ie Christensen, Esq. US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
84111 EMAIL
Sandra J. Padegimas, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 JFAX 8,602,6405009
Mary Jo O'Neill, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848

Loretta Medina, Esq. EEOC 505 MARQUETTE NW STE 900 ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87102

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
B ';'-

. , .', i1

FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL drVISJON •...

EQUAL EMPLOv:v1ENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff, vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., dba SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,
Defendant.
CRYSTLE COLLINS, Plaintiff in Intervention,
vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., et al.
Defendants.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Civil No. 2:00CV00774B Judge Dee V. Benson Magistrate Judge David Nuffer

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission" or "EEOC") filed this action against Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery, to enforce Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq. and Title I of the Civil Rights Act ofl991, 42 U.S.C. §1981(a). Crystle Collins intervened in the action.
The parties have reached a settlement of this matter resolving all claims ofthe

Commission and Plaintiff-Intervenor against Defendant arising out of the issues in this lawsuit. The tenus of the settlement are set forth in the Settlement Agreement attached as Exhibit A.
It is hereby ORDERED that the parties abide by the tenus ofthe attached Settlement Agreement. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over any action to enforce the Settlement Agreement for two years following the entry of this Order.
It is further ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs and attorneys' fees incurred in this action as of the date of the entry of this order.
DATED this 13iltray of_8,--,--e-=b,-~__., 2004
BY THE COURT:
-2-

APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO:
Mary .To O'Neill C. Emanuel Smith Sandra Padegimas Loretta Medina Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-9688 (602) 640-5061
Attorneys for Plaintiff

/
/
(
!
Heather E. orrison Hoole & King 4276 South Highland Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 (801) 272-7556
Attorneys for Plaintiff in Intervention

Mary Anne Q. ood Kathryn O. Ba mfort Wood Crapo LLC 60 East South Temp e, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, lJT 84111 (801) 366-6060
Attorneys for Defendant

-3-

.- APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO:

Mary Jo O'Neill C. Emanuel Smith Sandra Padegimas Loretta Medina Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-9688 (602) 640-5061
Attorneys for Plaintiff

ger H. oole Heather E. Morrison Hoole & K g 4276 South Highland Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 (801) 272-7556
Attorneys for Plaintiff in Intervention

Mary Anne Q. Wood Kathryn O. Balmforth Wood Crapo LLC 60 East South Temple, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 366-6060
Attorneys for Defendant

-3-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 13th day of Febmary, 2004, I caused a tme and correct copy of the foregoing ORDER OF DISMISSAL to be delivered in the manner indicated as follows:

Mary Jo O')leill (VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL) C. Emanuel Smith Sandra J. Padegimas Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 N. Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, AZ 85012-9688

Loretta Medina

(VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL)

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

505 Marquette NW, Suite 900

Albuquerque, NM 87102

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Roger H. Hoole

(VIA HAND DELIVERY)

Heather E. Morrison

Ashby D. Boyle II

Hoole & King, L.C.

4276 S. Highland Drive

Salt Lake City, Utah 84124

Attorneys for Intervening Plaintiff, Crystle Collins

4

kvs United States District Court
for the District of Utah February 13, 2004
* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLERK * *
Re: 2:00-cv-00774
True and correct copies of the attached were either mailed, faxed or e-mailed by the clerk to the following:
Ms. Lois A. Baar, Esq. JANOVE BAAR ASSOC 9 EXCHANGE PL STE 1112 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 EMAIL
Ms. Mary Anne Q. Wood, Esq. WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 EMAIL
Mr. Mark Dalton Dunn, Esq.
VICTORIA K KIDMAN « ASSOCIATES
III E BROADWAY STE 800 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111
Mr. Roger H. Hoole, Esq.
HOOLE « KING LC
4276 HIGHLAND DR SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84124 JFAX 9,2727557
Ms. Carlie Christensen, Esq. US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE , 84111 EMAIL
Sandra J. Padegimas, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 JFAX 8,602,6405009
Mary Jo O'Neill, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848

Loretta Medina, Esq. EEOC
505 MARQUETTE NW
STE 900
ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87102

 
 Roger H. Hoole 5089 Heather E. Morrison 6945 HOOLE & KING, L.C. 4276 South Highland Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 Telephone: (801) 272-7556
Attorneys for Plaintiff in Intervention, Crystle Collins
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY and TRISPUR INVESTMENTS, INC.,
Defendants.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT IN INTERVENTION

CRYSTLE COLLINS,
Plaintiff in Intervention,
vs.
SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY and TRISPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., a.k.a. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENTS, INC.,
Defendants.

Civil No. 2:00CV00774B Judge Dee V. Benson

fullO~~ Plaintiff, Crystle Collins, hereby complains, alleges and demands of Defendants Sbarro's
H."" Eatery and Tri-Spur Investment Company, 1=., a.k.a. Tri-Spur Investments, 1=.,,,

PARTIES

I. At all times material hereto, Crystal Collins (hereinafter "Miss Collins"), was a 16.

year old female citizen ofthe United States of America and a resident of Salt Lake County, State of

Utah.

2. Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., a.k.a. Tri-Spur Investments, Inc., is a corporation

organized in a state other than Utah, and is authorized to and is doing business in Utah through
i
various names, including but not limited to Sbarros Italian Eatery. (Sbarro's Italian Eatery and Tri-

Spur Investment Company, Inc., a.k.a. Tri-Spur Investments, Inc., are referred to hereinafter as "Tri-

Spur".)

3. At all times material hereto, Tri-Spur was an "employer" subject to suit under Title
i
VII of the Civil Rights Act ofl964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.c. § 2000e

et seq (hereinafter "Title VII"), in that Tri-Spur was engaged in an industry affecting commerce and

had 15 or more employees for each working day of 20 or more calendar weeks in the year of or

preceding, the filing ofthis Complaint, and had been continuously engaged in an industry affecting

commerce within the meaning of Title VII.

4.

At all times material hereto, Feli•,pe, a.k.a. Felipe Sanchez, a.k.a. Felipe Lisceno

i

(hereinafter "Mr. Sanchez"), was an employee of Tri-Spur working at one or more of its Sbarros

restaurants, including the Sbarros restaurant where Miss Collins worked located at the Fashion

Place Mall in Murray, Utah.

5. Attimes material hereto, Jose, a.k.a. Jose Soto, a.k.a. Jose Gonzalez (hereinafter "Mr.

Soto") was a Co-Manager and Chief Trainer working in various Sbarro's restaurants, including the

-2-

restaurant located at the Fashion Place Mall where Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins worked. At times

material hereto, Mr. Soto was Mr. Sanchez's and Miss Collins' immediate supervisor with

immediate or successively higher supervisory authority to make or influence employment decisions

regarding Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins, and particularly the terms and conditions of their

employment, including whether to hire and fire them.

6. At times material hereto, Kelly Schaeffer (hereinafter "Mr. Schaeffer") was the Co-

Manager of the Sbarros restaurant located at the Fashion Place Mall where Mr. Sanchez and Miss

• Collins worked. Mr. Schaeffer was an immediate supervisor ofMr. Sanchez and Miss Collins. with

immediate or successively higher supervisory authority to make or influence employment decisions

regarding Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins, and particularly the terms and conditions ofMr. Sanchez's

and Miss Collins' employment, including whether to hire and fire Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins.

7

At all times material hereto, Tonya Thompson (hereinafter "Ms. Thompson") was the

Co-Manager of the Sbarros restaurant located in the Fashion Place Mall where Mr. Sanchez and

Miss Collins worked. Ms. Thompson was Mr. Sanchez's and Miss Collins' immediate supervisor

with immediate or successively higher supervisory authority to make or influence employment

decisions regarding Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins, and particularly the terms and conditions of Mr.

Sanchez's and Miss Collins' employment, including whether to hire and fire Mr. Sanchez and Miss

Collins.

8. At all times material hereto, Mr. Sanchez, Mr. Soto, Mr. Schaeffer and Ms.

Thompson were agents, employees and servants of Tri-Spur, acting within the course and scope of

such agency and employment, and with the permission, consent and ratification of Tri-Spur.

-3-

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 9. Jurisdiction ofthe subject matter ofthis Action is established in this Court under Title VII, 42 U.S.c. §2000e-S(f)(3). 10. Venue for this Action is proper in this Court because a substantial part ofthe unlawful employment practices alleged herein were committed in Salt Lake County, Utah and within this Court's judicial district. II. On or about January 28, 1998, Miss Collins timely filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Utah Anti-Discrimination and Labor Division and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (hereinafter "EEOC'). On April 13,2000, the EEOC issued a For Cause Determination on the merits of Miss Collins' Charge of Discrimination. Copies of Miss Collins' Charge of Discrimination and the EEOC's For Cause Determination are respectively attached hereto as Exhibits "A" and "B", and incorporated herein by this reference.
FACTS 12. In July, 1997, Miss Collins became employed by Tri-Spur as a prep cook, server, cashier and dishwasher in its Sbarro's restaurant located at the Fashion Place Mall. 13. Shortly after Miss Collins became employed by Tri-Spur, Mr. Sanchez began to subject her to unwelcome and offensive comments of an explicit sexual nature, in both English and Spanish. For example, using English and/or Spanish, Mr. Sanchez frequently:
a. Propositioned Miss Collins for sex; b. Told her the different places where he and she could "fuck", such as her car, his car or at Sbarro's, etc.;
-4-

c. Told Miss Collins to "suck my dick" and to "suck me";

d. Called Miss Collins a "hoe", a "bitch", a "slut", a "fucker", a "fucking bitch",

and a "fucking slut", etc;

e. Told Miss Collins that he could "fuck" her "real good";

f. Told Miss Collins that he had dreams about them having sex;

g. Told Miss Collins that he had "wet dreams" about her;

h. Told Miss Collins that he wanted to rape her because she would not have sex

with him;

t.

Told Miss Collins that she had nice "tits";

J.

Told Miss Collins that she needed a "boob job" because her "boobs" were too

little to satisfy him;

k. Whispered grunting sounds of a sexual nature to Miss Collins as she worked;

and

I. Made other comments to her of an offensive sexual nature.

14. Mr. Sanchez often called Miss Collins names in Spanish, such as "puta madre", which

means "mother fucker". He gave her the nickname "Pendeja" which means "slut" in Spanish. and

as a result, some other Tri-Spur employees also called her that. Miss Collins, who speaks Spanish

like many other Tri-Spur employees, found these comments and nicknames offensive, humiliating

and embarrassing.

15. Mr. Sanchez made Miss Collins look at 2 photographs of a naked girl lying in sexual

positions. Mr. Sanchez bragged to Miss Collins that he had "fucked her" in Mexico. Later, he told

-5-

Miss Collins that although the girl in the pictures had not wanted to have sex with him, he had forced

her to and that he wished she had been Miss Collins instead.

16. Although Miss Collins did not know ifMr. Sanchez had actually raped the girl, his

claims frightened and intimidated her.

17. Mr. Sanchez's also engaged in sexually explicit conduct which involved Miss Collins

physically. For example, Mr. Sanchez:

a. Touched and fondled Miss Collins' breasts; b. Rubbed his crotch against Miss Collins;

c. Rubbed his hands and other parts of his body against Miss Collins' crotch;

d. Grabbed Miss Collins' buttocks as she worked in the front of the restaurant;

e. Licked Miss Collins' face and neck; f. Stuck his tongue in Miss Collins' ear;

g. Kissed Miss Collins;

h. Tried to hug Miss Collins;

1.

Snapped towels at Miss Collins' buttocks; and

J.

Engaged in other offensive sexually explicit physical conduct.

18. On one occasion, Mr. Sanchez pinched Miss Collins' arm hard enough that it started

to bleed. 19. Another time Mr. Sanchez threw water on her blouse, apparently so that her wet (and

therefore somewhat transparent) white blouse would stick to her breasts.

20. Miss Collins consideredMr. Sanchez's comments and conduct to be highly offensive

and derogatory, and objected verbally and/or physically to him when he harassed her.

-6-

21. Tri-Spur knew or should have known ofMr. Sanchez's practice ofsexually harassing other female employees in the workplace before and while he perpetrated his harassment on Miss Collins.
22. Miss Collins, who was 16 years old and employed for the first time, received no training from Tri-Spur relating to sexual harassment and no instruction regarding its sexual harassment policy. In fact, when she was hired, Miss Collins was not even afforded a reasonable opportunity to read its policy, and was never provided a copy of it. Moreover, during Miss Collins' employment, Tri-Spur never even posted any kind ofa notice to employees in the restaurant in which she worked, advising them what sexual harassment is, that sexual harassment is against the law and what they should to do if they were victims of it or aware of it.
23. Even if Miss Collins had received training and instruction on Tri-Spur's sexual harassment policy, it would have been futile for her to complain because Tri-Spur had no serious intention ofpreventing andlorcorrecting sexual harassment in its workplace. As alleged below, TriSpur's response to complaints of sexual harassment was to fire the victims.
24. Accordingly, no Tri-Spur employee, including Mr. Sanchez, and its managerial employees, were, to Miss Collins' knowledge, afforded any effective sexual harassment training during their employment which could have prevented improper conduct and enabled managers to promptly and effectively respond to sexual harassment if it did occur.
25. It was within this absence of effective training and instruction that Ms. Thompson, one of Miss Collins' managers, witnessed Mr. Sanchez subjecting Miss Collins to obviously unwelcome and offensive comments and conduct of a sexual nature. For example, on at least one occasion, Ms. Thompson overheard Mr. Sanchez say "pcnocha", which she understood meant
-7-

"vagina" in Spanish, to Miss Collins. On another occasion, Ms. Thompson saw Mr. Sanchez grab Miss Collins' buttocks.
26. Although Ms. Thompson verbally reprimanded Mr. Sanchez for the first incident, and in response to the second incident told him "Hey-leave my girls alone," she failed to prevent him from continuing to engage in further inappropriate verbal and physical conduct directed towards Miss Collins.
27. Other than as indicated in paragraph 26, Tri-Spur made no further effort to discipline
f
Mr. Sanchez or prevent him from engaging in his frequent barrage of unwelcomed and offensive sexually explicit conduct and comments.
28. Although Miss Collins knew of no effective process at Tri-Spur for stopping Mr. Sanchez's unwelcome and offensive sexual comments and conduct, in mid-August. she complained to Mr. Soto, one of Tri-Spur's Co-Managers and Trainers, while he was at the Sbarro's restaurant where Miss Collins worked. During her conversation with Mr. Soto, Miss Collins complained to him about Mr. Sanchez's sexually offensive physical and verbal conduct.
29. In response, Mr. Soto seemed indifferent to Miss Collins' complaints, but did tell her that he would talk to Mr. Sanchez.
30. Although Miss Collins does not know whether Mr. Soto ever confronted Mr. Sanchez about her complaints, Mr. Sanchez's behavior was somewhat improved for two or three days afterwards.
31. However, despite Ms. Thompson's knowledge that Miss Collins was being sexually harassed by Mr. Sanchez and Miss Collins' complaints to Mr. Soto, and despite the company's knowledge that Mr. Sanchez was sexually harassing Miss Collins and other female employees, Tri-
-8-

Spur failed to promptly and effectively respond to and stop Mr. Sanchez's unwelcomed and

offensive sexual comments and conduct.

32. Moreover, despite Tri-Spurs knowledge ofMr. Sanchez's on-going harassment. it

allowed him to remain employed as Miss Collins' co-worker.

33. Subsequent toMiss Collins' complaints, Mr. Sanchez, while working with her,

followed Miss Collins into a walk-in refrigerator, backed her into a corner and began to kiss her and

lick her face; he also tried to stick his tongue in her mouth and ear. She tried to push him away, but

Mr. Sanchez said, "Come on~I'mfucking horny" and "Let's fuck," and began to rub his erect penis

against her crotch. Miss Collins began crying and continued to try to push him away. Mr. Sanchez

tried to pick her up and she kicked him. When a co-worker opened the door to the walk-in

refrigerator, Mr. Sanchez released Miss Collins and walked out. The co-worker asked Miss Collins

if she was okay and then left She remained in the refrigerator until she could stop crying. This

encounter left her shaking for1J9urs, extremely e~barrassed and terrified of Mr. Sanchez.

":::=::

!

34. Later, on another occasion, after her shift was over and the mall had closed for the

night, Mr. Sanchez followed Miss Collins to her car. Although he did not try to touch her or speak

to her, the fact that he followed her to her car was extremely frightening to Miss Collins.

35. Another incident occurred days later while Miss Collins was washing dishes in the

back room at Sbarro's. Mr. Sanchez brought her a stack of dishes to wash, and while she had her

back to him, he grabbed her!=lY.her ponytail and turned her head around. He put his hands around her neck, and she believed that-he would choke her if she tried to scream. Then, he kissed and licked

her face, and tried to put his tongue down her throat. This time, Miss Collins was too afraid to push

-9-

him away or scream because she thought he would choke her. Mr. Sanchez said. "Look at me bitch. You're a slut. You better watch out or I'll rape you!" He then released her and walked away. leaving Miss Collins terrified.
36. Although Miss Collins continued to complain to Mr. Sanchez about his offensive. unwelcome and sexually derogatory conduct, her complaints to him were futile. Moreover, as Mr. Sanchez continued to engage in further sexually offensive and unwelcomed conduct, it began to become apparent to Miss Collins that Tri-Spur was disinterested in and willing to overlook his actions.
37. Having never received any kind of sexual harassment training, having received virtually no help from Tri-Spur in response to her complaints, and being fearful that she would lose her first job. Miss Collins did not know what to do and was so embarrassed and emotionally paralyzed that she was unable even to tell her parents what had been happening.
38. Finally, during approximately the third week of August, 1997, Miss Collins was by herself in the back room cleaning up after Sbarros had closed for the night. After the other employees, including Mr. Sanchez, had left, Mr. Sanchez returned to Sbarro 's and went into the back of the restaurant where Miss Collins was working, claiming that he had not clocked out and had left his keys. He asked her if she needed help cleaning up. Miss Collins was frightened to be alone with him and told him that she didn't need any help and that she just wanted to hurry up and go home.
39. Without warning, Mr. Sanchez grabbed Miss Collins and again kissed her, licked her face and stuck his tongue in her mouth. He also began to rub his crotch against her. She tried to push him away but he pushed her back, hard against a desk. As a result, she hit her back and fell to
-10-

the ground. He was immediately on top of her, saying in Spanish, "Trn going to tuck you, you little bitch-I'm finally going to rape you." He also called her a slut and threatened to kill her if she said anything about what he was doing to her.
40. By this time, Mr. Sanchez had a hold of her bangs, and was pulling her hair hard, throwing her head from side to side and banging it against the floor. Mr. Sanchez opened her shirt, ripping off a button, pulled down her bra and began grabbing her breasts. His weight made it difficult for her to breath and she thought she was going to pass out. His pants were open, and she could feel his erect penis through her clothes and was terrified.
41. Suddenly, there was a loud sound from out in front ofthe restaurant. and Mr. Sanchez got up and left quickly. Miss Collins laid there for what seemed like hours. crying and shaking. Humiliated and terrified, she left Sbarros, found someone whom she thought was a mall security guard and asked him to walk her to her car. He told her that he could not leave the mall, but agreed to watch her from inside while she walked to her car. She drove home in tears, not knowing what to do or think. The next morning, still shaken from the attack. she found dried blood on the hairline of her forehead.
42. Mr. Sanchez's assault and attempted rape of Miss Collins left her physically battered and emotionally devastated. It was particularly terrifying and paralyzing to her because Mr. Sanchez had bragged about raping the girl in Mexico.
43. Miss Collins was not scheduled to work the day after this assault. However. when she returned to work a day or so later, Mr. Sanchez told her, "Remember what I said to you.,. Miss
-11-

Collins understood that he was referring to his threat to kill her if she told anyone about what had happened. He also stated to her, "Next time I will rape you."
44. Within a few days ofthe attempted rape, Pam Bowen, one ofTri-Spur's owners, met with Ms. Thompson at the Sbarro's where Miss Collins worked. Cynthia Frampton, a Tri-Spur employee from another Sbarro's location, arrived apparently in an effort to talk with Mrs. Bowen about Mr. Sanchez's sexual harassment of her at the location where she worked. Mrs. Frampton, Mrs. Bowen and Ms. Thompson met together out in front of the restaurant. After the meeting, Mrs. Bowen and Ms. Thompson came into the back where Miss Collins was working. Mrs. Bowen appeared very angry and, in Miss Collins's presence, told Ms. Thompson that "Cindy doesn't know what she is talking about "; "She doesn't know what harassment is "; and "Cindy is just that kind ofgirl." These comments, and Mrs. Bowen's reaction to the complaints about Mr. Sanchez's sexual harassment, upset Miss Collins a great deal. After her shift, Miss Collins went home in tears.
45. When Miss Collins arrived home crying, her mother demanded to know what was going on at work. Miss Collins then told her mother about the attempted rape and the frequent barrage of sexual comments and conduct to which Mr. Sanchez continued to subject her. Mrs. Collins insisted on meeting immediately with Ms. Thompson, so she, together with Mr. Collins and their daughter, Miss Collins, returned to Tri-Spur and confronted Ms. Thompson with what was happening.
46. In response, Ms. Thompson told Miss Collins to write out a formal complaint. and that she would contact Tri-Spur's owners, John and Pam Bowen, to tell them about the on-going sexual harassment involving Miss Collins.
-12-

47. Ms. Thompson also reported Miss Collins' complaints to John and Pam Bowen. In response, Mrs. Bowen told Ms. Thompson that "Crystle hasn't worked here long enough and is too young to know what harassment is." She did not question Ms. Thompson about what had happened, but did say, in effect, "I know what you do in these situations->You fire the complainer." She then instructed Ms. Thompson to fire Miss Collins. She also stated that they would transfer Mr. Sanchez to another Tri-Spur location. Ms. Thompson protested that firing Miss Collins was an inappropriate way to respond to her complaints of sexual harassment and she refused to fire Miss Collins.
48. The next day, Miss Collins attempted to give Ms. Thompson her written summary of what had been going on with Mr. Sanchez, but Ms. Thompson told her that she could not accept it.
49. Miss Collins tried to work for a few hours that day, but was too emotionally upset to do so. Ms. Thompson told her that Tri-Spur would keep her on the schedule, but that she should go horne early. Miss Collins returned to the restaurant and was able to work the next day.
50. However, on the following day, when the next week's work schedule was posted, Miss Collins found that she was not on it. Ms. Thompson told her that she could corne in to work when she was able. Miss Collins told her that she thought she was up to working and asked her to put her back on the schedule. Ms. Thompson assured her that she would.
51. On approximately August 30, 1997, Miss Collins carne into the restaurant to see when Ms. Thompson had her scheduled for the following week, but Ms. Thompson was not there. However, Kelly Schaeffer, Tri-Spurs Co-Manager, told her that her services would no longer be required and terminated her employment without further explanation. Shortly thereafter, Tri-Spur also fired Ms. Thompson and Ms. Frampton.
-13-

52. Upon information and belief, Mr. Sanchez, Mr. Soto and Mr. Schaeffer remain employed by Tri-Spur.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Violation of Title VII-Sexnal Harassment) 53. Plaintiff incorporates herein the allegations contained in paragraphs I through 52 of this Complaint. 54. The sexually explicit conduct and comments ofMr. Sanchez, as alleged herein, were unwelcome, pervasive, frequent, humiliating, severe and changed the terms and conditions of her employment, and were both subjectively offensive to Miss Collins and objectively offensive to the average reasonable person.
I 55. Tri-Spur knew or should have known of Mr. Sanchez's sexual harassment of Miss Collins and other employees, and despite that knowledge. failed to take prompt and effective remedial action. 56. Tri-Spur also failed to effectively train Mr. Sanchez to refrain from sexual harassment, failed to implement and enforce a fair and effective sexual harassment policy and complaint procedure, and failed to act reasonably to prevent and promptly correct the sexual harassment of Miss Collins. 57. Not only did Tri-Spur fail to exercise reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct Mr. Sanchez's sexually harassing behavior, it intentionally condoned. furthered and ratified his conduct as its own, as alleged more fully herein. 58. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid violations of her rights under Title VII, Miss Collins was deprived of a work place free from a sexually hostile environment, causing
-14-

her to sustain a loss of income and benefits, incur expenses and suffer emotional, mental and physical injury, for which Tri-Spur is liable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks damages as hereinafter set forth. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violation of Title VII-Retaliation) 59. Plaintiff incorporates herein the allegations contained in paragraphs I through 58 of this Complain!. 60. Miss Collins' objections to being subjected to sexual harassment and her complaints to Tri-Spurs managers, as alleged herein, constituted protected opposition to unlawful discrimination and resulted in retaliatory discrimination against her by Tri-Spur. 61. As the result of Tri-Spur 's retaliation, Miss Collins suffered adverse employment action subsequent to and contemporaneous with engaging in protected activity. 62. As a direct and proximate result of the violations of her rights under Title VII. Miss Collins was subjected to unlawful retaliatory discrimination, the termination of her employment, a loss of income and benefits, and emotional, mental and physical injury, for which Tri-Spur is liable. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks damages as hereinafter set forth.
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 63. If this Court finds that Tri-Spur has intentionally engaged in unlawful employment practices as alleged herein, Miss Collins is entitled to declaratory relief or an order of the Court enjoining Tri-Spur from engaging in unlawful employment practices, together with such affirmative relief as may be appropriate.
-15-

PUNITIVE DAMAGES Tri-Spur's violations of Title VII were with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Miss Collins for which she is entitled to punitive damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1981a(b)(I).
REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS Miss Collins has had to retain counsel and therefore is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §2000e-5(k).
DEMAND FOR A JURY TRIAL
Miss Collins is entitled to, and hereby demands, ajury pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1981a et seq.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Miss Collins prays for judgment against Tri-Spur as follows: I. For actual, special, compensatory and punitive damages against in amounts to be awarded at trial, together with declaratory and injunctive relief; 2. For Plaintiffs costs in this Action, including reasonable attorneys' fees; and 3. For prejudgment interest on items of actual and special damage, together with such other and further relief as the Court deems just. DATED this ::, -{1-- day of April, 2001.
Roger H. oole Heather . Morrison Attorneys for Plaintiffin Intervention, Crystle Collins
-16-

VERIFICATION

STATE OF UTAH

)

:ss

COUNTY OF SALT LAKE )

Crystle Collins, having been duly sworn upon oath, deposes and states as follows:

1. I am the Plaintiff in Intervention in this Action.

2. I have read this Verified Complaint in Intervention.

3. As to the paragraphs containing factual information concerning myself, I have first-

hand information regarding the same and verify that they are correct to the best of my knowledge

and belief.

4. As to the paragraphs bearing on matters as to which I do not have first-hand

information, legal theories, or legal claims, I verify only that this is my Verified Complaint in

Intervention.

Crystle Collins Plaintiff in Intervention
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me this _ _ day of April, 2001.

Notary Public

-17-
.._ . _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Exhibits/ Attachments to this document have not been
scanned.
Please see the case file.

 
 CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

Electronic Case Filing System District of Utah (Central)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:00-cv-00774-DB

CLOSED, JURY

EEOC v. Sbarros Italian Eate, et al Assigned to: Judge Dee Benson Demand: $0 Cause: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
1 of 36

Date Filed: 09/29/2000 Date Terminated: 02/13/2004 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff
represented by Carlie Christensen US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE (UT) SALT LAKE CITY, UT 00000 (801)524-5682 Email: Carlie.Christensen@usdoj.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ralph E. Chamness SALT LAKE CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE 451 S STATE ST STE 505 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 (801)535-7630 Email: ralph.chamness@slcgov.com TERMINATED: 02/06/2003 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Sandra J. Padegimas EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION (AZ) PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 (602)640-5000 Email: sandra.padegimas@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
C. Emanuel Smith EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION (AZ) PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848
6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report
Intervenor Plaintiff Crystal Collins
2 of 36

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...
(602)640-5000 Email: emanuel.smith@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Loretta F. Medina EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION (NM) ALBUQUERQUE AREA OFFICE 505 MARQUETTE NW STE 900 ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87102-2189 (505)248-5230 Email: loretta.medina@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mary Jo O'Neill EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION (AZ) PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 (602)640-5000 Email: mary.oneill@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard R Trujillo EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 (602)640-5000
Sally C. Shanley EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION (AZ) PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848 (602)640-5032 Email: sally.shanley@eeoc.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Mark Dalton Dunn KIDMAN & ASSOCIATES 111 E BROADWAY STE 750 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 (801)257-7200 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report
V. Defendant Sbarros Italian Eatery
3 of 36

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...
Ashby D. Boyle, II FILLMORE SPENCER 8813 TRACY DR SANDY, UT 84093 (801) 573-8163 Email: adblaw@msn.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Heather E. Morrison SATE OF UTAH LABOR COMMISSION ANTIDISCRIMINATION & LABOR DIV 160 E 300 S 3RD FLR SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114 (801)530-6921 Email: hmorrison@utah.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Roger H. Hoole HOOLE & KING LC 4276 HIGHLAND DR SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84124 (801)272-7556 Email: rogerh@hooleking.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Mary Anne Q. Wood WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 (801)366-6060 Email: mawood@woodcrapo.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kathryn Ogden Balmforth WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 (801)366-6060 Email: kobalmforth@woodcrapo.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard J. Armstrong WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500
6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report
Defendant Tri-Spur Investments TERMINATED: 03/08/2002
Intervenor Defendant Sbarros Italian Eatery
Intervenor Defendant Tri-Spur Investments TERMINATED: 03/08/2002
Intervenor Defendant Tri-Spur Investments TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 doing business as Sbarros Italian Eatery
4 of 36

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 (801)366-6060 Email: rjarmstrong@woodcrapo.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Mary Anne Q. Wood (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kathryn Ogden Balmforth (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Richard J. Armstrong (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Mary Anne Q. Wood (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kathryn Ogden Balmforth (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Mary Anne Q. Wood (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kathryn Ogden Balmforth (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

also known as Tri-Spur Investment II LLC Intervenor Defendant Berkley Corporation TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 doing business as Sbarros Italian Eatery Defendant Tri-Spur TERMINATED: 03/12/2002
Defendant Berkley Corporation TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 doing business as Sbarros Italian Eatery
Mediator Lois A. Baar mediator

represented by Mary Anne Q. Wood (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kathryn Ogden Balmforth (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Mary Anne Q. Wood (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kathryn Ogden Balmforth (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/08/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Lois A. Baar HOLLAND & HART (UT) 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 2000 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111-1031 (801)799-5929 Email: labaar@hollandhart.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 09/29/2000

#

Docket Text

1 Complaint filed, assigned to Judge Dee Benson Receipt #: waived (ksp) (Entered: 10/02/2000)

5 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

10/17/2000 10/25/2000 10/25/2000 12/01/2000 12/04/2000 12/15/2000 12/15/2000 12/21/2000 01/17/2001 01/18/2001 01/29/2001
01/29/2001 02/02/2001 02/05/2001 02/09/2001 02/12/2001

2 Motion by Crystal Collins to intervene by Crystal Collins (jmr) (Entered: 10/19/2000)
3 Motion and Order signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 10/25/00. Granting motion /PHV for Attorney: Richard R. Trujillo on behalf of plaintiff EEOC. cc: atty (ce) (Entered: 10/26/2000)
4 Motion and Order signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 10/25/00. Granting motion /PHV for Attorney: Curley Emanuel Smith on behalf of plaintiff EEOC. cc: atty (ce) (Entered: 10/26/2000)
5 Answer to Complaint by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv (ksp) (Entered: 12/04/2000)
6 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in opposition to [2-1] motion to intervene by Crystal Collins (jmr) (Entered: 12/05/2000)
7 Magistrate Notice of Hearing Initial Pretrial Conference set for 10:30 1/29/01 To be held before Judge Boyce cc:atty ( Ntc generated by: SA's sec, CN) (ce) (Entered: 12/15/2000)
8 Notice of attorney appearance for Crystal Collins by Roger H. Hoole, Heather E. Morrison (asb) (Entered: 12/18/2000)
9 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [2-1] motion to intervene by Crystal Collins (alp) (Entered: 12/22/2000)
10 REPORT of Attorney Planning Meeting (alt) (Entered: 01/18/2001)
11 Request for Ruling/Ntc to Submit by movant Crystal Collins RE: [2-1] motion to intervene by Crystal Collins (alt) (Entered: 01/22/2001)
12 Scheduling order setting: Joining of parties, amending of pleadings on 4:30 4/27/01; Deadline for filing of all motions 4:30 11/5/01; Discovery cutoff 4:30 10/5/01; Final Pretrial Conference for 3:30 3/1/02; 5-Day Jury Trial for 8:30 3/18/02 Rule 26(f)(1) cnf held. Expert witness disclosure dates set. Not Referred to ADR. Discovery limits per Rules. Planning Rpt approved except as provided by this order. See order for details. Signed by Judge Ronald N. Boyce 1/29/01 cc:atty. Settlement Potential: Unknown (alt) (Entered: 01/30/2001)
13 Notice of filing by Crystal Collins of proposed verified cmp in intervention: proposed cmp attached as Exhibit A (alt) (Entered: 01/30/2001)
14 Certificate of service by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: Dfts' Rule 26 Initial Disclosures. (jmr) (Entered: 02/05/2001)
15 Certificate of service by EEOC re:Pla's Initial Disclosures. (jmr) (Entered: 02/06/2001)
16 Motion and Order signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 2/8/01 . Granting motion /PHV for Attorney: Sally Shanley on behalf of plaintiff EEOC (jmr) (Entered: 02/09/2001)
17 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv to compel Deposition of Crystle Collins (jmr) (Entered: 02/13/2001)

6 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

02/12/2001 02/21/2001 02/21/2001 02/27/2001 03/02/2001 03/02/2001 03/05/2001 03/08/2001
03/12/2001
03/13/2001 03/14/2001 04/05/2001 04/11/2001
04/13/2001
04/13/2001 04/16/2001 04/18/2001

18 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in support of [17-1] motion to compel Deposition of Crystle Collins (jmr) (Entered: 02/13/2001)
19 Stipulation by EEOC, Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv Stip for leave to file amended answer (jmr) (Entered: 02/22/2001)
Proposed document from Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv entitled Amended Answer. (jmr) (Entered: 02/22/2001)
20 Order granting [19-1] stipulation motion for leave to file amended answer signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 2/26/01 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 02/27/2001)
21 Amended Answer to Complaint by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv : amends [5-1] answer (jmr) (Entered: 03/02/2001)
22 Withdrawal of [17-1] motion to compel Deposition of Crystle Collins (jmr) (Entered: 03/05/2001)
23 Order granting [2-1] motion to intervene by Crystal Collins signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 2/26/01 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 03/05/2001)
24 Return of service executed re: Subpoena for Family Counseling Center. Served on 3/7/01 on Wilmas Vasquez, Receptionist. Subpoena for Jordan Valley Family Health served on Fawn Downward, Admin Asst on 3/7/01. Subpoena fro Carmela J. Kormanik MD, personally on 3/7/01. (jmr) (Entered: 03/09/2001)
25 Return of service executed re: Subpoenas served on Kearns High School c/o Julie Joos and Copper Hills High School c/o Kathy John on 3/9/01. (jmr) (Entered: 03/13/2001)
26 Return of service executed re: Subpoena served on 3/12/01 for Julie A. Bullen, c/o Wilma Vasquez. (jmr) (Entered: 03/14/2001)
27 Certificate of service by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: dft's 1st set of Interogs & req for production of docs. (ksp) (Entered: 03/15/2001)
28 Return of service executed re: Subpoena served Paulette Caprai Finley, personally on 3/14/01 (jmr) (Entered: 04/05/2001)
29 Certificate of service by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: Dft's Responses to Pla's First Set of Interrogs and Request for Prod of Docs. (jmr) (Entered: 04/12/2001)
30 Return of service executed re: Subpoena served on Workers Compensation Fund of UT, served on Kaye Jensen, Legal Secretary on 4/11/01. (jmr) (Entered: 04/16/2001)
31 Return of service executed re: Subpeona served on Department of Public Safety c/o Rosalie Kirk on 4/12/01. (jmr) (Entered: 04/16/2001)
32 Intervenor's complaint filed by movant Crystal Collins , as against Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv (jmr) (Entered: 04/17/2001)
33 Certificate of service by EEOC re: Pla's First Supplement to Initial Disclosures. (jmr) (Entered: 04/19/2001)

7 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

04/19/2001 04/19/2001 04/27/2001 04/27/2001 05/03/2001
05/14/2001 05/14/2001 05/16/2001 05/16/2001
05/16/2001 05/17/2001 05/23/2001 05/30/2001 06/06/2001 06/06/2001 06/07/2001
06/07/2001 06/07/2001 06/12/2001

34 Amended intervenor's complaint by Crystal Collins : amending [32-1] intervenor complaint (jmr) (Entered: 04/19/2001)
35 Return of service executed re: Subpoena served on Julie Bullen, personally on 4/12/01. (jmr) (Entered: 04/20/2001)
36 Motion by EEOC for leave to file amended complaint (jmr) (Entered: 04/27/2001)
37 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [36-1] motion for leave to file amended complaint (jmr) (Entered: 04/27/2001)
38 Return of summons executed as to Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv, Berkley Corp 4/26/01 served on Drue Bowen Price, Registered agent for above companies. (jmr) (Entered: 05/03/2001)
39 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in opposition to [36-1] motion for leave to file amended complaint (jmr) (Entered: 05/15/2001)
40 Declaration of Walter J. Johnston Re: [39-1] opposition memorandum (jmr) (Entered: 05/15/2001)
41 Answer by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv to verified amended complaint in intervention (jmr) (Entered: 05/17/2001)
43 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv, Berkley Corp in support of [42-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint in intervention (jmr) (Entered: 05/17/2001)
44 Substituted Declaration of Walter J. Johnston Re: [40-1] declaration (jmr) (Entered: 05/17/2001)
42 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv, Berkley Corp to dismiss amended complaint in intervention (jmr) (Entered: 05/17/2001)
45 Substituted Second Declaration of Walter J. Johnston Re: [43-1] support memorandum (jmr) (Entered: 05/23/2001)
46 Reply by EEOC to response to [36-1] motion for leave to file amended complaint (jmr) (Entered: 05/30/2001)
47 Motion by Crystal Collins to extend time in which to conduct discovery (jmr) (Entered: 06/06/2001)
48 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [47-1] motion to extend time in which to conduct discovery (jmr) (Entered: 06/06/2001)
49 Order of Reference as authorized by 28 USC 636(b)(1)(A). Magistrate Judge to hear/determine all non-dispositive matters. Signed by Dee Benson on 6/7/01 (jmr) (Entered: 06/08/2001)
Case referred to magistrate under 28:636(b)(1)(A). (jmr) (Entered: 06/08/2001)
50 Rule 56 (f) Affidavit of Heather E. Morrison (asp) (Entered: 06/08/2001)
51 Case referred to Judge David O. Nuffer cc: atty (ce) (Entered: 06/12/2001)

8 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

06/15/2001
06/22/2001 06/25/2001 06/28/2001
07/09/2001 07/09/2001 07/13/2001 07/26/2001 07/26/2001 07/26/2001 07/26/2001
08/10/2001 08/15/2001
08/15/2001 08/15/2001 08/15/2001 08/17/2001

52 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv for leave to file surreply to pla's reply memorandum in support of motion for leave to file amended complaint (jmr) (Entered: 06/18/2001)
53 Memorandum by Tri-Spur Inv, Berkley Corp in opposition to [47-1] motion to extend time in which to conduct discovery (jmr) (Entered: 06/25/2001)
54 Surreply Brief by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: EEOC's [46-1] response reply (jmr) (Entered: 06/26/2001)
55 Order granting [52-1] motion for leave to file surreply to pla's reply memorandum in support of motion for leave to file amended complaint within 15 days of this Order, signed by Judge David O. Nuffer , June 27, 2001 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 06/29/2001)
56 Request for Ruling by intervenor-plaintiff Crystal Collins RE: [47-1] motion to extend time in which to conduct discovery (jmr) (Entered: 07/09/2001)
57 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [47-1] motion to extend time in which to conduct discovery (jmr) (Entered: 07/09/2001)
58 Return of service executed re: Subpeona served on Jerome Bowen c/o Tammy Smith on 7/3/01. (jmr) (Entered: 07/16/2001)
59 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv to extend time for filing of Dft's Expert Reports (jmr) (Entered: 07/27/2001)
60 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in support of [59-1] motion to extend time for filing of Dft's Expert Reports (jmr) (Entered: 07/27/2001)
61 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv for Psychiatric Exam by Dr. Noel Gardner and Dr. David Ranks (jmr) (Entered: 07/27/2001)
62 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in support of [61-1] motion for Psychiatric Exam by Dr. Noel Gardner and Dr. David Ranks (jmr) (Entered: 07/27/2001)
63 Certificate of service by Crystal Collins re: Expert Report of George J. Throckmorton. (jmr) (Entered: 08/13/2001)
64 Ex parte motion by Crystal Collins for intervening pla Collins leave to file overlength memo in oppo to motion for mental exam under Rule 35 (ce) (Entered: 08/15/2001)
65 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in opposition to [61-1] motion for Psychiatric Exam by Dr. Noel Gardner and Dr. David Ranks (ce) (Entered: 08/15/2001)
66 Request for hrg filed by Crystal Collins re: [61-1] motion for Psychiatric Exam by Dr. Noel Gardner and Dr. David Ranks (ce) (Entered: 08/15/2001)
67 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [61-1] motion for Psychiatric Exam by Dr. Noel Gardner and Dr. David Ranks (ce) (Entered: 08/16/2001)
68 Order granting [64-1] ex parte motion for intervening pla Collins leave to file overlength memo in oppo to motion for mental exam under Rule 35 signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson 8/17/01. cc:atty (ce) (Entered: 08/17/2001)

9 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

08/23/2001
08/24/2001 08/29/2001 08/30/2001 08/30/2001 09/05/2001
09/05/2001 09/06/2001
09/06/2001
09/07/2001
09/10/2001 09/13/2001 09/13/2001 09/13/2001 09/13/2001 09/17/2001 09/18/2001

70 Stipulation by EEOC, Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv, Crystal Collins stip to extend time to 9/4/01 for dfts to file reply mem/sup of mot/mental exam (alt) (Entered: 08/27/2001)
69 Motion by Crystal Collins for Mark Dalton Dunn to withdraw as attorney (alt) (Entered: 08/27/2001)
73 Certificate of service by Crystal Collins re: supp disclosures (kvs) (Entered: 09/05/2001)
71 Certificate of service by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: dfts first req for prod of docs to intervening pla Crystle Collins (kvs) (Entered: 09/05/2001)
72 Certificate of service by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: dfts second req for prod pf docs to pla EEOC (kvs) (Entered: 09/05/2001)
74 Combined Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv to response to [61-1] motion for Psychiatric Exam by Dr. Noel Gardner and Dr. David Ranks (kvs) (Entered: 09/05/2001)
75 Return of service executed re: subp served on Cynthis Fletcher 09/03/01; Paulette Caprai Finley on 09/03/01 (kvs) (Entered: 09/05/2001)
76 Supplemental Exhibits filed by defendant Sbarros Italian Eate, defendant Tri-Spur Inv in support of [74-1] response reply of dfts motion for mental exam under Rule 35 (ce) (Entered: 09/07/2001)
77 Return of service executed re: subp served on Jose Alejandro Mayo, 9/5/01; Carmela J. Kormanik MD, 9/5/01; Lisa Farnsworth, 9/4/01; Thomas M. Collins, 9/4/01 (ce) (Entered: 09/07/2001)
78 Return of service executed re: subp served on Alta View OB/GYN Assoc c/o Cathi Bailey, 9/6/01; Tonya Thompson, 9/6/01; Family Cnslng Center c/o Karolynn Kemple, 9/6/01 (ce) (Entered: 09/10/2001)
79 Certificate of service by Crystal Collins re: 1st set of Interrogs & req for prod of docs (ksp) (Entered: 09/11/2001)
80 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv for leave to Take Additional Depositions (ksp) (Entered: 09/14/2001)
81 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in support of [80-1] motion for leave to Take Additional Depositions (ksp) (Entered: 09/14/2001)
82 Declaration of Mary Anne Q. Wood Re: [80-1] motion for leave to Take Additional Depositions (ksp) (Entered: 09/14/2001)
83 Ex parte motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv for expedited Hearing on Motion for leave to take additional depos (ksp) (Entered: 09/14/2001)
84 Return of service executed re: Subpoena served upon Julie Bullen on 09/12/01. (asp) (Entered: 09/18/2001)
85 Joint Declaration of Roger H. Hoole and Heather E. Morrison (asp) (Entered: 09/18/2001)

10 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

09/18/2001
09/18/2001 09/18/2001 09/19/2001 09/21/2001 09/25/2001 09/28/2001 10/01/2001 10/01/2001 10/02/2001 10/03/2001 10/05/2001 10/05/2001 10/11/2001 10/24/2001 10/25/2001

86 Order granting [83-1] ex parte motion for expedited Hearing on Motion for leave to take additional depos, Motion hearing set for 5:00 9/19/01 for [80-1] motion for leave to Take Additional Depositions, set for 5:00 9/19/01 for [61-1] motion for Psychiatric Exam by Dr. Noel Gardner and Dr. David Ranks, set for 5:00 9/19/01 for [59-1] motion to extend time for filing of Dft's Expert Reports, set for 5:00 9/19/01 for [47-1] motion to extend time in which to conduct discovery signed by Judge David O. Nuffer , 09/17/01 cc:atty (asp) (Entered: 09/18/2001)
87 Order granting [36-1] motion for leave to file amended complaint signed by Judge David O. Nuffer , 09/17/01 cc:atty (asp) (Entered: 09/18/2001)
88 Declaration of Mary Anne Q. Wood Re: motion for protective order (not filed with court) (kvs) (Entered: 09/19/2001)
89 Memorandum RE: list of discovery issues and proposed resolutions filed by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv (ce) (Entered: 09/19/2001)
90 Return of service executed re: Subpoena served on Pam Warfiled on 9/19/01. (ksp) (Entered: 09/24/2001)
91 Amended complaint by EEOC added party(ies): Tri-Spur, Berkley Corp . Amends [1-1] complaint; jury demand (asp) (Entered: 09/25/2001)
92 Motion by Tri-Spur Inv, Sbarros Italian Eate to show cause why Julie A. Bullen, CSW should not be held in contempt for failure to honor a lawfully issued and served subp (ce) (Entered: 10/01/2001)
93 Return of service executed re: subp served on Kelly Schaeffer, 9/12/01 (ce) (Entered: 10/02/2001)
94 Return of service executed re: subp served on Kelly Schaeffer, 9/18/01; Jerome Bowen, 9/12/01 (ce) (Entered: 10/02/2001)
95 Return of service executed as to Amy LaDue on 10/01/01 (kvs) (Entered: 10/03/2001)
96 Certificate of service by Crystal Collins re: dfts first req/prod of docs (kvs) (Entered: 10/03/2001)
97 Certificate of service by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: Dft's Responses to Pla Collins' First Set of Interrogs and Request for Prod of Docs to Dft Tri-Spur. (jmr) (Entered: 10/09/2001)
98 Withdrawal of [92-1] motion to show cause why Julie A. Bullen, CSW should not be held in contempt for failure to honor a lawfully issued and served subp (jmr) (Entered: 10/09/2001)
99 Answer by Tri-Spur Inv, Sbarros Italian Eate to amended complaint; jury demand (ce) (Entered: 10/12/2001)
101 Certificate of service by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv Re: Defendant's Second Supplementation of its Responses to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogs and Request for Production of Documents. (asp) (Entered: 10/26/2001)
100 Order granting Tri-Spur's [80-1] motion for leave to Take Additional Depositions - Tri-Spur may take all the depos it has currently notices and in addtn, the depos

11 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

10/26/2001 10/31/2001 11/01/2001 11/01/2001 11/01/2001 11/05/2001 11/05/2001 11/05/2001 11/05/2001 12/04/2001
12/04/2001
12/06/2001
12/06/2001

of two of Crystal Collins' health care providers who have not been previously deposed. The depo of Charles Rahill may be taken in Phx, AZ. If Felipe Lisceno or Jose Gonzales Soto are located, even after disc has closed on 10/5/01, their depos may be taken by any party. If any party locates a current address or telephone no. for either Mr. Lisceno or Mr. Gonzales Soto, it shall be provided to the other parties forthwith, granting Tri-Spur's [61-1] motion for Psychiatric Exam, granting Tri-Spur's [59-1] motion to extend time for filing of Dft's Expert Reports, granting pla Collins' [47-1] motion to extend time in which to conduct discovery re: depos of Tri-Spur and Berkley Corp via designated representatives, Tri-Spur's motion for protective order granted in part and denied in part - depo of Tri-Spur Inv LLC to be held in Rexburg, ID; Berkley Bowen will be desig as rep of Berkley Corp and the depo of Berkley Corp will be taken in New York City , Tri-spur to provide plas w/the home addresses of Janet Webster and Walter Johnston, forthwith signed by Judge David O. Nuffer , 10/24/01. cc:atty (ce) (Entered: 10/26/2001)
102 Return of service executed re: subp served on Jose Gonzales, 10/18/01 (ce) (Entered: 10/29/2001)
Transcript of Proceedings for date(s) of 9/19/01 re: motion hrg held before DON. Court Reporter: Laura Robinson, Alpha Ct Rptg Svc (alt) (Entered: 10/31/2001)
103 Substituted Declaration of Noel Gardner, MD (ce) (Entered: 11/02/2001)
104 Substituted Second Declaration of Noel Gardner, MD (ce) (Entered: 11/02/2001)
105 Certificate of service by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: expert report of Noel C. Gardner, MD (ce) (Entered: 11/02/2001)
106 Motion by Tri-Spur Inv, Sbarros Italian Eate for summary judgment (asp) (Entered: 11/06/2001)
106 Request for Argument filed by Tri-Spur Inv, Sbarros Italian Eate on [106-1] motion for summary judgment (asp) (Entered: 11/06/2001)
107 Memorandum by Tri-Spur Inv, Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [106-1] motion for summary judgment (asp) (Entered: 11/06/2001)
108 Exhibits filed by defendant Tri-Spur Inv, defendant Sbarros Italian Eate RE: [107-1] support memorandum (asp) (Entered: 11/06/2001)
109 Second Motion by Crystal Collins to extend time upto 12/14/01 to file memorandum in opposition to Dfts' Motion to Dismiss (jmr) (Entered: 12/05/2001)
110 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [109-1] motion to extend time upto 12/14/01 to file memorandum in opposition to Dfts' Motion to Dismiss (jmr) (Entered: 12/05/2001)
111 Motion by EEOC to extend time to file a mem opp to dft's mot summary jgm , to strike the current trial date of 3/18/02 , to expedite a ruling on this motion (blk) (Entered: 12/06/2001)
112 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [111-1] motion to extend time to file a mem opp to dft's mot summary jgm, [111-2] motion to strike the current trial date

12 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

12/10/2001 12/10/2001
12/13/2001 12/13/2001
12/14/2001 12/14/2001
12/17/2001 12/20/2001
12/20/2001 12/20/2001 12/20/2001 12/24/2001 12/26/2001 12/26/2001
12/26/2001
01/02/2002

of 3/18/02, [111-3] motion to expedite a ruling on this motion (blk) (Entered: 12/06/2001)
113 Memorandum by Tri-Spur Inv in opposition to [110-1] support memorandum of second motion for extension of time (kvs) (Entered: 12/11/2001)
114 Order granting [111-1] motion to extend time to file a mem opp to dft's mot summary jgm signed by Judge David O. Nuffer , 12/07/01 cc:atty (kvs) (Entered: 12/12/2001)
115 Motion by Crystal Collins to extend time to respond to motion for summary judgment until 12/17/01 (kvs) (Entered: 12/13/2001)
116 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [115-1] motion to extend time to respond to motion for summary judgment until 12/17/01 (kvs) (Entered: 12/13/2001)
118 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in opposition to [42-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint in intervention (asp) (Entered: 12/17/2001)
117 Order granting [109-1] motion to extend time upto 12/14/01 to file memorandum in opposition to Dfts' Motion to Dismiss signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 12/13/01 cc:atty (blk) (Entered: 12/20/2001)
119 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in opposition to [106-1] motion for summary judgment (blk) (Entered: 12/18/2001)
120 Order granting [115-1] motion to extend time to respond to motion for summary judgment until 12/17/01 signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 12/19/01 cc:atty (blk) (Entered: 12/20/2001)
121 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [106-1] motion for summary judgment (blk) (Entered: 12/20/2001)
122 Motion by EEOC to strike certain of dfts' facts in support of dts' motion for summary judgment (blk) (Entered: 12/20/2001)
123 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [122-1] motion to strike certain of dfts' facts in support of dts' motion for summary judgment (blk) (Entered: 12/20/2001)
124 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in opposition to [111-2] motion to strike the current trial date of 3/18/02 (kvs) (Entered: 12/26/2001)
125 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv to response to [42-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint in intervention (kvs) (Entered: 12/27/2001)
126 Motion by Tri-Spur Inv to extend time to file reply memoranda on its motion for summary judgment and memorandum in opposition to EEOC's motion to strike (kvs) (Entered: 12/27/2001)
127 Memorandum by Tri-Spur Inv in support of [126-1] motion to extend time to file reply memoranda on its motion for summary judgment and memorandum in opposition to EEOC's motion to strike (kvs) (Entered: 12/27/2001)
128 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in opposition to [126-1] motion to extend time to file reply memoranda on its motion for summary judgment and memorandum in opposition to EEOC's motion to strike (blk) (Entered: 01/03/2002)

13 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

01/02/2002 01/02/2002 01/04/2002 01/07/2002 01/22/2002 01/22/2002 01/22/2002 01/22/2002 01/24/2002 01/24/2002 01/24/2002 01/24/2002 01/24/2002 01/25/2002 01/30/2002
02/01/2002

129 Declaration of Tonya Thompson Re: [128-1] opposition memorandum (blk) (Entered: 01/03/2002)
130 Declaration of Crystle Collins Re: [128-1] opposition memorandum (blk) (Entered: 01/03/2002)
131 Notice of Hearing filed : Motion hearing set for 2:00 1/30/02 for [42-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint in intervention To be held before Judge DB. cc:atty ( Ntc generated by: DB's chambers) (ce) (Entered: 01/04/2002)
132 Response by EEOC to [126-1] motion to extend time to file reply memoranda on its motion for summary judgment and memorandum in opposition to EEOC's motion to strike (jmr) (Entered: 01/07/2002)
133 Request for Ruling by plaintiff EEOC RE: [111-2] motion to strike the current trial date of 3/18/02 (ce) (Entered: 01/23/2002)
134 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in opposition to [122-1] motion to strike certain of dfts' facts in support of dts' motion for summary judgment (ce) (Entered: 01/23/2002)
135 Combined Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv to response to [106-1] motion for summary judgment (ce) (Entered: 01/23/2002)
135 Request for Argument filed by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv on [106-1] motion for summary judgment (ce) (Entered: 01/23/2002)
136 Notice of Hearing filed : Motion hearing set for 2:00 3/20/02 for [106-1] motion for summary judgment To be held before Judge DB cc:atty ( Ntc generated by: DB's chambers) (ce) (Entered: 01/24/2002)
137 Order granting [111-2] motion to strike the current trial date of 3/18/02, terminated deadlines re trial set for 3/18/02 signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 1/24/02. cc:atty (ce) (Entered: 01/24/2002)
138 Errata to [135-1] response reply filed by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv. (jmr) (Entered: 01/25/2002)
139 Request for Ruling by defendant Sbarros Italian Eate, defendant Tri-Spur Inv RE: [106-1] motion for summary judgment (jmr) (Entered: 01/25/2002)
139 Request for hrg filed by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv re: [106-1] motion for summary judgment (jmr) (Entered: 01/25/2002)
140 Motion by Tri-Spur Inv, Sbarros Italian Eate, Berkley Corp to dismiss amd cmp as against dfts Tri-Spur dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery and Berkley Corp, intvd (ce) (Entered: 01/28/2002)
142 Minute entry: After arguments were heard on dft's [42-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint in intervention. Crt ruled: Taking the matter under advisement. [42-1] motion to dismiss amended complaint in intervention taken under advisement ; Judge: Dee Benson Court Reporter: Ed Young Court Deputy: Ron Black (rb) (Entered: 02/01/2002)
141 Motion by Crystal Collins for Joinder w/EEOC's [122-1] motion to strike certain of dfts' facts in support of dts' motion for summary judgment (ce) (Entered:

14 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

02/01/2002 02/04/2002 02/04/2002 02/07/2002 02/11/2002 02/15/2002 02/19/2002 02/19/2002 02/20/2002
02/22/2002

02/01/2002)
141 Motion by Crystal Collins to strike certain of dft's facts in supp of dft's mot/sumjgm (intvp Collins joined w/EEOC's mot/strike no. 122) (ce) (Entered: 02/01/2002)
143 Return of summons executed as to Tri-Spur c/o Drue Bowen Price, Berkley Corp c/o Drue Bowen Price 1/13/02. Answer due on 2/4/02 for Tri-Spur Inv, for Sbarros Italian Eate (jmr) (Entered: 02/04/2002)
144 Reply by EEOC to response to [122-1] motion to strike certain of dfts' facts in support of dts' motion for summary judgment (ce) (Entered: 02/05/2002)
145 Order granting in part, denying in part [122-1] motion to strike certain of dfts' facts in support of dts' motion for summary judgment: GRANTED w/respect to those facts that are irrelevant or contain inappropriate legal conclusion, DENIED as to remaining facts - See order for details. Signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 2/6/02 cc:atty (alt) (Entered: 02/08/2002)
146 Request for Ruling by plaintiff EEOC RE: [122-1] motion to strike certain of dfts' facts in support of dts' motion for summary judgment (alt) (Entered: 02/12/2002)
147 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [140-1] motion to dismiss amd cmp as against dfts Tri-Spur dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery and Berkley Corp, intvd (ce) (Entered: 02/19/2002)
148 Motion by EEOC to strike [135-1] response reply to motion for summary judgment: specifically the 215 pages numbered via roman numerals that precede dft Tri-Spur's twenty page section of its reply brief entitled "Argument" and to strike the exhibits submitted in supp of Tri-Spur's reply (ce) (Entered: 02/21/2002)
149 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [148-1] motion to strike [135-1] response reply to motion for summary judgment: specifically the 215 pages numbered via roman numerals that precede dft Tri-Spur's twenty page section of its reply brief entitled "Argument" and to strike the exhibits submitted in supp of Tri-Spur's reply (ce) (Entered: 02/21/2002)
150 Motion by Crystal Collins for Joinder RE: EEOC's [148-1] motion to strike [135-1] combined response reply of Tri-Spur to motion for summary judgment re: disputed material facts: specifically the 215 pages numbered via roman numerals that precede dft Tri-Spur's twenty page section of its reply brief entitled "Argument" and to strike the exhibits submitted in supp of Tri-Spur's said reply , Intvp Crystal Collins joined this motion of the EEOC: to strike [135-1] combined response reply to motion for summary judgment re: disputed material facts: specifically the 215 pages numbered via roman numerals that precede dft Tri-Spur's twenty page section of its reply brief entitled "Argument" and to strike the exhibits submitted in support of Tri-Spur's said reply (ce) Modified on 02/21/2002 (Entered: 02/21/2002)
151 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv, Tri-Spur, Berkley Corp to response to [140-1] motion to dismiss amd cmp as against dfts Tri-Spur dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery and Berkley Corp, intvd (tsh) (Entered: 02/26/2002)

15 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

03/05/2002
03/06/2002 03/06/2002 03/07/2002 03/08/2002 03/15/2002 03/15/2002 03/15/2002
03/19/2002
03/20/2002 03/20/2002

152 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in opposition to [150-2] motion Intvp Crystal Collins joined this motion of the EEOC: to strike [135-1] combined response reply to motion for summary judgment re: disputed material facts: specifically the 215 pages numbered via roman numerals that precede dft Tri-Spur's twenty page section of its reply brief entitled "Argument" and to strike the exhibits submitted in support of Tri-Spur's said reply (kvs) (Entered: 03/06/2002)
153 Motion and Order signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 03/06/02 Granting motion/PHV for Attorney Sandra J. Padegimas on behalf of plaintiff EEOC cc:attys (kvs) (Entered: 03/06/2002)
154 Motion and Order signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 03/06/02 Granting motion/PHV for Attorney Mary Jo O'Neill on behalf of plaintiff EEOC cc:attys (kvs) (Entered: 03/06/2002)
155 Request for Ruling by defendant Sbarros Italian Eate, defendant Tri-Spur Inv, defendant Berkley Corp RE: [140-1] motion to dismiss amd cmp as against dfts Tri-Spur dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery and Berkley Corp, intvd (ce) (Entered: 03/07/2002)
156 Memorandum Decision granting [140-1] motion to dismiss amd cmp as against dfts Tri-Spur dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery and Berkley Corp, intvd signed by Judge DB 3/7/02 cc:atty (alp) (Entered: 03/12/2002)
157 Motion by Crystal Collins for entry of final judgment by Crystal Collins (jmr) (Entered: 03/18/2002)
158 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [157-1] motion for entry of final judgment by Crystal Collins (jmr) (Entered: 03/18/2002)
159 Order denying [148-1] motion to strike [135-1] response reply to motion for summary judgment: specifically the 215 pages numbered via roman numerals that precede dft Tri-Spur's twenty page section of its reply brief entitled "Argument" and to strike the exhibits submitted in supp of Tri-Spur's reply signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 3/15/02 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 03/18/2002)
160 Reply by EEOC to response to [150-2] motion Intvp Crystal Collins joined this motion of the EEOC: to strike [135-1] combined response reply to motion for summary judgment re: disputed material facts: specifically the 215 pages numbered via roman numerals that precede dft Tri-Spur's twenty page section of its reply brief entitled "Argument" and to strike the exhibits submitted in support of Tri-Spur's said reply (kvs) (Entered: 03/19/2002)
161 Errata to [157-1] motion for entry of final judgment by Crystal Collins, [158-1] support memorandum filed by Crystal Collins . (kvs) (Entered: 03/20/2002)
162 Minute entry: After arguments were heard on Tri Spur's Inv and Sbarros Italian motion for summary judgment, Crt ruled: Granting as to Cynthia Frampton Fletcher, motion denied as to Chrystal Collins; Motion is factually denied as to Tonya Thompson. Court took under advisement procedural issue regarding Tonya Thompson and as to all University Mall parties. Crt will issue an opinion within the next few weeks.granting in part, denying in part [106-1] motion for summary judgment ; Judge: Dee Benson Court Reporter: Ed Young Court

16 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

03/27/2002 03/27/2002
03/28/2002 04/01/2002 04/12/2002
04/15/2002
04/16/2002 04/17/2002 04/17/2002 04/22/2002 04/25/2002
05/13/2002

Deputy: Ron Black (rb) (Entered: 03/21/2002)
163 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate for reconsideration of [162-1] oral order on summary judgment issued from the bench at the 3/20/02 hearing on Tri-Spur's Motion for Summary Judgment, in which the Court denied, inter alia, Tri-Spur's Motion with respect to Crystle Collins' claims. (blk) (Entered: 03/28/2002)
164 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eatery in support of [163-1] motion for reconsideration of [162-1] oral order on summary judgment issued from the bench at the 3/20/02 hearing on Tri-Spur's Motion for Summary Judgment, in which the Court denied, inter alia, Tri-Spur's Motion with respect to Crystle Collins' claims. (blk) (Entered: 03/28/2002)
165 Addendum to [164-1] support memorandum filed by Sbarros Italian Eatery . (blk) (Entered: 03/28/2002)
166 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv in opposition to [157-1] motion for entry of final judgment by Crystal Collins (kvs) (Entered: 04/02/2002)
167 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in opposition to Dft's [163-1] motion for reconsideration of [162-1] oral order on summary judgment issued from the bench at the 3/20/02 hearing on Tri-Spur's Motion for Summary Judgment, in which the Court denied, inter alia, Tri-Spur's Motion with respect to Crystle Collins' claims. (jmr) (Entered: 04/12/2002)
168 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [163-1] motion for reconsideration of [162-1] oral order on summary judgment issued from the bench at the 3/20/02 hearing on Tri-Spur's Motion for Summary Judgment, in which the Court denied, inter alia, Tri-Spur's Motion with respect to Crystle Collins' claims. (jmr) (Entered: 04/15/2002)
169 Memorandum Decision granting in part, denying in part Tri-Spur's [106-1] motion for summary judgment signed by DB, 4/15/02. Motion granted w/respect to Pamela Warfield's retaliation claims and denied as to the remaining issues. cc:atty (ce) (Entered: 04/17/2002)
170 Request for Ruling by intervenor-plaintiff Crystal Collins RE: [157-1] motion for entry of final judgment by Crystal Collins (kvs) (Entered: 04/17/2002)
171 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [157-1] motion for entry of final judgment by Crystal Collins (kvs) (Entered: 04/17/2002)
172 Order denying [157-1] motion for entry of final judgment by Crystal Collins signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 4/18/02. cc:atty (ce) (Entered: 04/22/2002)
173 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [163-1] motion for reconsideration of [162-1] oral order on summary judgment issued from the bench at the 3/20/02 hearing on Tri-Spur's Motion for Summary Judgment, in which the Court denied, inter alia, Tri-Spur's Motion with respect to Crystle Collins' claims. (jmr) (Entered: 04/26/2002)
174 Order denying [163-1] motion for reconsideration of [162-1] oral order on summary judgment issued from the bench at the 3/20/02 hearing on Tri-Spur's Motion for Summary Judgment, in which the Court denied, inter alia, Tri-Spur's Motion with respect to Crystle Collins' claims. Signed by Chief Judge Dee

17 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

06/26/2002 07/02/2002 11/05/2002
11/22/2002 11/22/2002 11/22/2002 11/26/2002 12/02/2002 12/04/2002 12/04/2002 12/05/2002 12/06/2002 12/06/2002 12/06/2002
12/09/2002
12/09/2002

Benson, 5/9/02 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 05/13/2002)
175 Stipulation by EEOC, Sbarros Italian Eate, Crystal Collins stip/mot for confidentiality order (ksp) (Entered: 06/28/2002)
176 Confidentiality/Protective Order granting [175-1] stip/mot for confidentiality order. Signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson 7/1/02. cc: atty (ce) (Entered: 07/02/2002)
177 Scheduling order Setting 5-day Jury Trial for 8:30 1/13/03 ; Final Pretrial Conference for 2:00 12/19/02; All final disclosures are due 12/2/02; All objections and motions in limine are due on 12/13/02 Signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson 11/04/02 cc:atty. (blk) (Entered: 11/07/2002)
178 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony (kvs) (Entered: 11/25/2002)
179 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [178-1] motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony (kvs) (Entered: 11/25/2002)
180 Ex parte motion by Crystal Collins for leave to file Overlength Memorandum in Support of her Motion in Limine to Exclude Proposed Expert Testimony (kvs) (Entered: 11/25/2002)
181 Ex parte order granting [180-1] ex parte motion for leave to file Overlength Memorandum in Support of her Motion in Limine to Exclude Proposed Expert Testimony signed by DB, 11/26/02 cc: atty (Entered: 12/03/2002)
182 Witness and exhibit list by Sbarros Italian Eate (blk) (Entered: 12/04/2002)
183 Certificate of service re: discovery by Crystal Collins (blk) (Entered: 12/05/2002)
184 Witness and exhibit list by Crystal Collins (blk) (Entered: 12/05/2002)
185 Certificate of service re: final rule 26 supplementation by EEOC (blk) (Entered: 12/05/2002)
186 Witness and exhibit list by EEOC (entitled: Final Pretrial Dcls) (alt) (Entered: 12/09/2002)
187 Motion by Tri-Spur Inv to extend time for dft Tri-Spur to resp to Collins' Daubert motion in limine to exclude proposed exp testimony until 10 days after 12/13/02, or no earlier than 12/30/02 (alt) (Entered: 12/09/2002)
188 Memorandum by Tri-Spur Inv in support of [187-1] motion to extend time for dft Tri-Spur to resp to Collins' Daubert motion in limine to exclude proposed exp testimony until 10 days after 12/13/02, or no earlier than 12/30/02 (alt) (Entered: 12/09/2002)
189 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in opposition to [187-1] motion to extend time for dft Tri-Spur to resp to Collins' Daubert motion in limine to exclude proposed exp testimony until 10 days after 12/13/02, or no earlier than 12/30/02 (Entered: 12/10/2002)
190 Addendum to [182-1] list witness exhibit filed by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur Inv. (alt) (Entered: 12/10/2002)

18 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

12/10/2002
12/11/2002
12/16/2002 12/23/2002 12/31/2002 01/06/2003
01/06/2003 01/14/2003 01/27/2003 01/30/2003 01/30/2003 01/30/2003 02/04/2003 02/06/2003 02/13/2003

191 Reply by Tri-Spur Inv to response to [187-1] motion to extend time for dft Tri-Spur to resp to Collins' Daubert motion in limine to exclude proposed exp testimony until 10 days after 12/13/02, or no earlier than 12/30/02 (alt) (Entered: 12/10/2002)
192 Request for Ruling by intervenor-plaintiff Crystal Collins RE: [187-1] motion to extend time for dft Tri-Spur to resp to Collins' Daubert motion in limine to exclude proposed exp testimony until 10 days after 12/13/02, or no earlier than 12/30/02 (alt) (Entered: 12/12/2002)
194 Certificate of service re: draft proposed pretrial order by EEOC (alt) (Entered: 01/03/2003)
193 Request for hrg filed by Crystal Collins re: [178-1] motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony (ce) (Entered: 12/24/2002)
195 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [178-1] motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony (alt) (Entered: 01/03/2003)
196 Stipulation by EEOC, Sbarros Italian Eate, Crystal Collins Stip to file re: Daubert Motions in Limine, due date for responses, hearing date for Motions in Limine, Final Pretrial Order deadline, proposed jury instructions deadline, final pretrial conference date and jury trial date (jmr) (Entered: 01/07/2003)
197 Substitued Declaration of C. Brady Wilson, PhD, filed original signature to substitute for the faxed copy. (jmr) (Entered: 01/07/2003)
198 Substituted Curriculum Vitae and Third Declaration of Dr. David Ranks. (jmr) Modified on 01/14/2003 (Entered: 01/14/2003)
199 Ex parte motion by EEOC for Ralph E. Chamness to withdraw as attorney for EEOC (jmr) (Entered: 01/27/2003)
200 Ex parte motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Sbarros Italian Eate for leave to file overlength memorandum in support of motion to exclude testimony (jmr) (Entered: 01/31/2003)
201 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate, Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude testimony of Carmela J. Kormanik, MD filed by Dfts (jmr) (Entered: 01/31/2003)
202 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [201-1] motion to exclude testimony of Carmela J. Kormanik, MD filed by Dfts (jmr) (Entered: 01/31/2003)
203 Substituted Fourt Declaration of Dr. David Ranks. (jmr) (Entered: 02/05/2003)
204 Order granting [199-1] ex parte motion for Ralph E. Chamness to withdraw as attorney for EEOC (Terminated attorney Ralph E. Chamness for EEOC signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 2/5/03 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 02/06/2003)
205 Stipulation by EEOC, Sbarros Italian Eate Stip to extend time upto 2/20/03 to file a reply memo in support of Crystal Collins' Daubert Motion in Limine to exclude Proposed Testimony and the plaintiffs may have upto 2/20/03 to file a memorandum in opposition to Dfts' Motion to Exclude Testimony of Carmela J. Kormanik (jmr) (Entered: 02/14/2003)

19 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

02/20/2003 02/20/2003 02/20/2003 02/20/2003 02/21/2003
02/25/2003
02/26/2003 03/03/2003 03/04/2003
03/06/2003 03/13/2003 04/04/2003 04/04/2003

206 Ex parte motion by Crystal Collins for leave to file overlength reply memo in supp of pla Collins' Daubert motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony (ce) (Entered: 02/21/2003)
207 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [178-1] motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony (ce) (Entered: 02/21/2003)
208 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in opposition to [201-1] motion to exclude testimony of Carmela J. Kormanik, MD filed by Dfts (ce) (Entered: 02/21/2003)
209 Second Declaration of C. Brady Wilson, PhD Re: response to the third decl of Noel C. Gardner MD (ce) (Entered: 02/21/2003)
210 Order granting [205-1] stipulation to extend time up to 2/20/03 to file a reply memo in support of Collins' Daubert Motion in Limine to exclude Proposed Testimony and the plaintiffs may have up to 2/20/03 to file memorandum in opposition to Dfts' Motion to Exclude Testimony of Carmela J. Kormanik signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 2/21/03. cc:atty (ce) (Entered: 02/24/2003)
211 Scheduling order Setting: dft's oppo to pla Collins Daubert motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony (Daubert motion) due 12/30/02; pla's rply memo on the Daubert motion due 1/31/03; obj and motions in limine due 4/23/03 at 5:00 p.m.; oppositions to motion in limine due 5/7/03 at 5:00 p.m.; rply memoranda on the mots/in limine due 5/21/03 at 5:00 p.m.; Deadline for Hearing of all Motions in limine (other than the Daubert motion) set for 2:00 6/2/03 ; PTO due on 6/9/03 ; Proposed jury inst/voir dire/special verdict forms due 6/30/03 at 5:00 p.m.; Final Pretrial Conference for 2:00 6/16/03 ; Ten Day Jury Trial for 8:30 7/7/03 Signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson 2/24/03. cc:atty. (ce) (Entered: 02/25/2003)
212 Motion and Order signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 2/26/03. Granting motion/PHV for Attorney Loretta Medina on behalf of plaintiff EEOC cc:attys (ce) (Entered: 02/27/2003)
213 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [201-1] motion to exclude testimony of Carmela J. Kormanik, MD filed by Dfts (jmr) (Entered: 03/03/2003)
214 Notice of Hearing filed : Motion hearing set for 2:00 on 4/9/03 for [178-1] motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony, set for 2:00 on 4/9/03 for [201-1] motion to exclude testimony of Carmela J. Kormanik, MD filed by Dfts To be held before Judge Dee Benson cc:atty ( Ntc generated by: Chambers DB, RB.) (jmr) (Entered: 03/04/2003)
215 Substituted Second Declaration of C. Brady Wilson Re: [197-1] declaration (jmr) (Entered: 03/06/2003)
216 Supplementation/Errata to expert reports filed by Sbarros Italian Eate . (jmr) (Entered: 03/13/2003)
217 Motion by EEOC to refer to crt's alternative dispute resolution program for mediation (ce) (Entered: 04/04/2003)
218 Motion by EEOC to continue hrg on dft's motion to exclude testimony of Carmel J. Kormanik, MD (ce) (Entered: 04/04/2003)

20 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

04/07/2003
04/07/2003 04/09/2003
04/11/2003 04/15/2003
04/15/2003 04/16/2003 04/16/2003 04/21/2003
04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003

219 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [218-1] motion to continue hrg on dft's motion to exclude testimony of Carmel J. Kormanik, MD (jmr) (Entered: 04/07/2003)
220 Declaration of David Ranks PhD. (jmr) (Entered: 04/08/2003)
222 Minute entry: After arguments were heard on the motion in limine, Crt ruled: taking the matter under advisement. [178-1] motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony taken under advisement ; Judge: Dee Court Reporter: Ed Young Court Deputy: Ron Black (rb) (Entered: 04/15/2003)
221 Sixth Declaration of David Ranks PhD. (jmr) (Entered: 04/14/2003)
223 Order granting [217-1] motion to refer to crt's alternative dispute resolution program for mediation signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 4/14/03 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 04/15/2003)
223 Order of referral to ADR program for Mediation signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson 4/14/03 cc: atty (jmr) (Entered: 04/17/2003)
224 Motion by Crystal Collins to strike [221-1] declaration of David Ranks as Untimely (jmr) (Entered: 04/17/2003)
225 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [224-1] motion to strike [221-1] declaration of David Ranks as Untimely (jmr) (Entered: 04/17/2003)
226 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate, Tri-Spur, Berkley Corp in opposition to Pla Collins' [224-1] motion to strike [221-1] declaration of David Ranks as Untimely (jmr) (Entered: 04/21/2003)
227 SEALED (per chambers) Motion by EEOC in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
228 SEALED (per chambers) Memorandum by EEOC in support of [227-1] motion in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
229 SEALED (per chambers) Motion by EEOC in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
230 SEALED(per chambers) Memorandum by EEOC in support of [229-1] motion in limine to (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
231 SEALED(per chambers) Affidavit of Loretta Medina Re: [230-1] support memorandum (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
232 SEALED(per chambers) Motion by EEOC in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
233 SEALED(per chambers) Memorandum by EEOC in support of [232-1] motion in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
234 SEALED(per chambers) Motion by EEOC in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
235 SEALED(per chambers) Memorandum by EEOC in support of [234-1] motion in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)

21 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/23/2003 04/28/2003
04/28/2003
04/30/2003 04/30/2003 05/02/2003 05/23/2003 06/25/2003 06/27/2003

236 SEALED(per chambers) Motion by EEOC in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
237 SEALED(per chambers) Memorandum by EEOC in support of [236-1] motion in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
238 SEALED(per chambers) Motion by EEOC in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
239 SEALED(per chambers) Memorandum by EEOC in support of [238-1] motion in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
240 SEALED(per chambers) Motion by EEOC in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
241 SEALED(per chambers) Memorandum by EEOC in support of [240-1] motion in limine (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
242 SEALED(per chambers) Affidavit of Loretta Medina Re: [241-1] support memorandum (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
243 SEALED(per chambers) Objections by EEOC (jmr) Modified on 04/24/2003 (Entered: 04/24/2003)
244 Order granting in part, denying in part [178-1] motion in limine to exclude proposed expert testimony, Because the Court finds Dr. Ranks' testimony to be unhelpful to a jury, it is inadmissible except in the event that plas attempt to attack the methodology and testing used by Dr. Ranks and relied upon by Dr. Gardner, SO ORDERED See order for details. Signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 4/25/03 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 04/29/2003)
245 Order, staying this case upon referral to the ADR program , sealing EEOC's motions in limine and their corresponding memos in support filed with this court on 4/23/03 See order for details. Signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 4/25/03 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 04/29/2003)
246 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [224-1] motion to strike [221-1] sixth declaration of David Ranks as Untimely (jmr) (Entered: 05/01/2003)
247 Motion by Crystal Collins for expedited scheduling conference (jmr) (Entered: 05/01/2003)
248 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Collins'[247-1] motion for expedited scheduling conference (jmr) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
249 Notice of Mediation Conference Mediation Conference set for 9:30 5/29/03 at the Frank E Moss Courthouse , Notice of appointment of mediator: Lois A. Baar cc:ptys (ce) (Entered: 05/23/2003)
250 Motion by Crystal Collins for Hearing re: Scheduling (jmr) (Entered: 06/25/2003)
251 Minute entry re: Mediation Conference Report terminated deadlines re: mediation conf held 5/29/03 , Second Mediation Conference set for 9:00 6/23/03 (ce) (Entered: 06/27/2003)

22 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

06/27/2003 06/27/2003 07/02/2003 07/18/2003 07/23/2003
07/28/2003
08/01/2003 08/06/2003 08/06/2003 08/12/2003 08/14/2003 08/15/2003 08/15/2003 08/18/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003

252 Minute entry re: Mediation Conference Report - Second session terminated deadlines re: second mediation conf held 6/23/03 - parties unable to reach settlement (ce) (Entered: 06/27/2003)
253 Magistrate Notice of Hearing scheduling conference set for 3:00 p.m. on 7/30/03 To be held before Judge Nuffer cc:atty ( Ntc generated by: Chambers DN, LL.) (jmr) (Entered: 06/30/2003)
254 Notice reminder of Attorneys' Planning Meeting Report due five days from receipt of this notice re: Initial Pretrial Conference 3:00 7/30/03 before Judge DON, cc:attys (ce) (Entered: 07/02/2003)
255 Amended Magistrate Notice of Hearing Initial Pretrial Conference reset for 4:00 7/30/03 To be held before Judge Nuffer cc:atty ( Ntc generated by: DON's chambers) (ce) (Entered: 07/18/2003)
257 Scheduling order Setting; Special Attorney Conference by 10/31/03 ; Final Pretrial Conference for 2:30 p.m. on 11/12/03 ; Ten Day Jury Trial for 8:30 12/1/03. See order for additional details. Signed by Judge David Nuffer on 7/23/03 cc:atty. (jmr) (Entered: 07/29/2003)
256 Amended Notice of Hearing filed terminated deadlines re: sched cnf and IPT prev set for 7/30/03 . Court to issue final sched order setting dates for filing and hrg on motions in limine, final pretrial conf and 10 day jury trial. Judge DON cc:atty ( Ntc generated by: DON's chambers) (ce) (Entered: 07/28/2003)
258 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to amend [257-1] Scheduling order (jmr) (Entered: 08/04/2003)
259 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [258-1] motion to amend [257-1] Scheduling order (jmr) (Entered: 08/07/2003)
260 Motion by EEOC to extend time to disclose and exchange demonstrative exhibits or animations (jmr) (Entered: 08/07/2003)
261 Certificate of service by EEOC re: Filing Final Pretrial Disclosures. (jmr) (Entered: 08/13/2003)
262 Certificate of service by Crystal Collins re: Notice of Filing of Pla Crystle Collins' Final Pretrial Dislosures (jmr) (Entered: 08/15/2003)
263 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [258-1] motion to amend [257-1] Scheduling order (jmr) (Entered: 08/18/2003)
264 Witness and exhibit list/Final Pretrial Disclosures by Sbarros Italian Eate (jmr) (Entered: 08/18/2003)
265 Notice of Partial Withdrawal of [258-1] motion to amend [257-1] Scheduling order as to Hearing on Motions in Limine. (jmr) (Entered: 08/20/2003)
266 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude evidence or argument that suggests EEOC altered or destroyed records (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
267 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [266-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence or argument that suggests EEOC altered or destroyed records (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)

23 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003
08/22/2003
08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003

268 Affidavit of Charles Rahill Re: [267-1] support memorandum in support of motion in limine to exclude evidence or argument that suggests EEOC altered or destroyed documents (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
269 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude evidence that other female employees were not victims of sexual harrassment (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
270 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude evidence concerning Ms. THompson's Eligibility for Rehire (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
271 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [270-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning Ms. THompson's Eligibility for Rehire (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
272 Affidavit of Loretta Medina Re: [271-1] support memorandum of its motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning Ms. Thompson's Eligibility for Rehire (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
273 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude evidence comcerning complaints and charges of discrimination against dfts by employees other than Crystle Collins, Cynthia Harris, Christina Byrne, Lisa Farnsworth, Tonya THompson and Pamela Warfield (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
274 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [273-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence comcerning complaints and charges of discrimination against dfts by employees other than Crystle Collins, Cynthia Harris, Christina Byrne, Lisa Farnsworth, Tonya THompson and Pamela Warfield (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
275 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude evidence concerning intimate personal information of a sexual nature (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
276 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [275-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning intimate personal information of a sexual nature (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
277 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude evidence concerning "crude language" and actions directed to non-harassers (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
278 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [277-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning "crude language" and actions directed to non-harassers (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
279 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude testimony from certain dfts witnesses (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
280 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [279-1] motion in limine to exclude testimony from certain dfts witnesses (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
281 Affidavit of Loretta Medina Re: [280-1] support memorandum of its motion in limine to exclude testimony from certain dfts witnesses (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
282 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude evidence concerning children born out of wedlock (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)

24 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003

283 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [269-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence that other female employees were not victims of sexual harrassment (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
284 Affidavit of Loretta Medina Re: [283-1] support memorandum in suppost of its motion in limine to exclude evidence that other female employees were not victims of sexual harassment (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
285 Objections by EEOC [264-1]to exhibits and witnesses in dfts final pretrial disclosures of 08/15/03 (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
286 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude testimony of undisclosed witnesses and other undisclosed evidence (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
287 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [286-1] motion to exclude testimony of undisclosed witnesses and other undisclosed evidence (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
288 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude testimony of Tom Collins (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
289 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [288-1] motion to exclude testimony of Tom Collins (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
290 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude testimony and other evidence of or concerning dismissed parties and claims (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
291 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [290-1] motion to exclude testimony and other evidence of or concerning dismissed parties and claims (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
292 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude evidence of financial condition of dft until entitlement to punitive damages has been established (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
293 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [292-1] motion to exclude evidence of financial condition of dft until entitlement to punitive damages has been established (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
294 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude evidence regarding unreported acts of coworker sexual harrassment (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
295 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [294-1] motion to exclude evidence regarding unreported acts of coworker sexual harrassment (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
296 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude hearsay evidence in the form of declarations, affidavits, and other written statements (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
297 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [296-1] motion to exclude hearsay evidence in the form of declarations, affidavits, and other written statements (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
298 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude medical records of Dr. Carmela Kormanik (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)

25 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003
08/22/2003 08/22/2003
08/22/2003 08/22/2003
08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003

299 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [298-1] motion to exclude medical records of Dr. Carmela Kormanik (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
300 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude use of various depositions (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
301 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [300-1] motion to exclude use of various depositions (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
302 Objections by Sbarros Italian Eatery to plas EEOC's Final Pretrial Disclosures Dated 08/08/03 (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
303 Objections by Sbarros Italian Eatery to pla in intervention Crystle Collins' Final Pretrial disclosures dated 12/03/02 (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
304 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eatery to equalize peremptory challenges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1870 (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
305 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [304-1] motion to equalize peremptory challenges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1870 (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
306 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to preclude duplicative testimony by plaintiffs (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
307 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [306-1] motion to preclude duplicative testimony by plaintiffs (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
308 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude conciliation failure letters and administrative charges of discrimination (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
309 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [308-1] motion to exclude conciliation failure letters and administrative charges of discrimination (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
310 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to exclude testimony of TOnya THompson regarding alleged statement by Pamela Bowen (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
311 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [310-1] motion to exclude testimony of TOnya THompson regarding alleged statement by Pamela Bowen (kvs) (Entered: 08/22/2003)
312 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude evidence regarding undisclosed and unproduced exhibits (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
313 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [312-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding undisclosed and unproduced exhibits (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
314 Objections by Crystal Collins to dft's pretrial disclosures. (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
315 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude evidence regarding Jose Mayo (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
316 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [315-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding Jose Mayo (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)

26 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003
08/22/2003 08/22/2003
08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003 08/22/2003

317 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude gynecological and obstetrical records (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
318 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [317-1] motion in limine to exclude gynecological and obstetrical records (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
319 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude certain medical records (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
320 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [319-1] motion in limine to exclude certain medical records (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
321 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude certain medical billing and insurance records (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
322 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [321-1] motion in limine to exclude certain medical billing and insurance records (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
323 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude evidence regarding her at-will employment history (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
324 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [323-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding her at-will employment history (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
325 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude evidence regarding arguments of counsel (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
326 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [325-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding arguments of counsel (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
327 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude Martin Gonzales (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
328 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [327-1] motion in limine to exclude Martin Gonzales (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
329 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude evidence regarding her sexual history (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
330 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [329-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding her sexual history (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
331 Motion by Crystal Collins to exclude Horatio Arias (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
332 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [331-1] motion to exclude Horatio Arias (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
333 Motion by Crystal Collins to exclude evidence/preclude calling Noel Gardner MD and David Ranks PhD (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)
334 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [333-1] motion to exclude evidence/preclude calling Noel Gardner MD and David Ranks PhD (jmr) (Entered: 08/25/2003)

27 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

08/22/2003 08/28/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003
09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003

335 Memorandum by EEOC in support of [282-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning children born out of wedlock. (jmr) (Entered: 08/26/2003)
336 Order, amending [257-1] Scheduling order , Jury trial re set for 8:30 a.m. on 2/2/04 signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 08/29/2003)
337 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [310-1] motion to exclude testimony of Tonya Thompson regarding alleged statement by Pamela Bowen (jmr) (Entered: 09/08/2003)
338 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Crystal Collins' [331-1] motion to exclude Horatio Arias (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
339 Sealed Combined Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [329-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding her sexual history (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
340 SEALED Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate for evidence under FRCP 412 against plas Crystal Collins, Cindy Harris and Pamela Warfield (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
339 SEALED Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [340-1] motion for evidence under FRCP 412 against plas Crystal Collins, Cindy Harris and Pamela Warfield (jmr) Modified on 09/15/2003 (Entered: 09/09/2003)
341 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Crystle Collins' [325-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding arguments of counsel (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
342 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Crystal Collins' [323-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding her at-will employment history (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
343 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Crystal Collins'[321-1] motion in limine to exclude certain medical billing and insurance records (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
344 Combined Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Crystal Collins' [319-1] motion in limine to exclude certain medical records, Crystal Collins' [317-1] motion in limine to exclude gynecological and obstetrical records (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
345 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Crystal Collins' [315-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding Jose Mayo (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
346 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Crystal Collins' [312-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding undisclosed and unproduced exhibits (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
347 SEALED Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [282-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning children born out of wedlock (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
347 SEALED Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [340-1] motion for evidence under FRCP 412 against plas Crystal Collins, Cindy Harris and Pamela

28 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003
09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003

Warfield (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
348 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [279-1] motion in limine to exclude testimony from certain dfts witnesses (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
349 SEALED Combined Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [275-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning intimate personal information of a sexual nature (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
349 SEALED Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [340-1] motion for evidence under FRCP 412 against plas Crystal Collins, Cindy Harris and Pamela Warfield (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
350 Combined Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to EEOC's [273-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence comcerning complaints and charges of discrimination against dfts by employees other than Crystle Collins, Cynthia Harris, Christina Byrne, Lisa Farnsworth, Tonya THompson and Pamela Warfield, [269-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence that other female employees were not victims of sexual harrassment (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
351 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to EEOC's [270-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning Ms. THompson's Eligibility for Rehire (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
352 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to EEOC's [266-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence or argument that suggests EEOC altered or destroyed records (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
353 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to Crystal Collins' [333-1] motion to exclude evidence/preclude calling Noel Gardner MD and David Ranks PhD (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
354 SEALED Combined Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [277-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning "crude language" and actions directed to non-harassers (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
354 SEALED Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [340-1] motion for evidence under FRCP 412 against plas Crystal Collins, Cindy Harris and Pamela Warfield (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
355 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to Dft's [308-1] motion to exclude conciliation failure letters and administrative charges of discrimination (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
356 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to Dft's [306-1] motion to preclude duplicative testimony by plaintiffs (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
357 Response by EEOC to Dft's [304-1] motion to equalize peremptory challenges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1870 (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
358 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to dft's [286-1] motion to exclude testimony of undisclosed witnesses and other undisclosed evidence (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
361 Memorandum by EEOC, Crystal Collins in opposition to Dft's [290-1] motion to exclude testimony and other evidence of or concerning dismissed parties and

29 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/05/2003 09/08/2003 09/08/2003 09/08/2003 09/09/2003 09/09/2003 09/15/2003 09/18/2003 09/19/2003 09/23/2003 09/23/2003 09/23/2003

claims (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
362 Memorandum by EEOC, Crystal Collins in opposition to dft's [294-1] motion to exclude evidence regarding unreported acts of coworker sexual harrassment (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
363 Memorandum by EEOC, Crystal Collins in opposition to dft's [288-1] motion to exclude testimony of Tom Collins (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
364 Memorandum by EEOC, Crystal Collins in opposition to [298-1] motion to exclude medical records of Dr. Carmela Kormanik (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
365 Memorandum by EEOC, Crystal Collins in opposition to dft's [300-1] motion to exclude use of various depositions (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
368 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [327-1] motion in limine to exclude Martin Gonzales (jmr) (Entered: 09/15/2003)
359 Response by EEOC, Crystal Collins to [292-1] motion to exclude evidence of financial condition of dft until entitlement to punitive damages has been established (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
360 Ex parte motion by EEOC, Crystal Collins for leave to file overlength memo to dft's motion to exclude hearsay evidence (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
Proposed document from EEOC, Crystal Collins entitled Pla's Opposition to Dft's Motion in Limine to Exclude hearsay evidence in the form of declarations, affidavits and other written statements (jmr) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
366 Order granting [360-1] ex parte motion for leave to file overlength memo to dft's motion to exclude hearsay evidence. Signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson, 9/8/03 cc:atty (jmr) (Entered: 09/10/2003)
367 Memorandum by EEOC, Crystal Collins in opposition to Dft's [296-1] motion to exclude hearsay evidence in the form of declarations, affidavits, and other written statements (jmr) (Entered: 09/10/2003)
369 Order denying [201-1] motion to exclude testimony of Carmela J. Kormanik, MD filed by Dfts signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 09/11/03 cc:atty (kvs) (Entered: 09/16/2003)
370 Stipulation by Crystal Collins Stip to extend time until 09/26/03 to serve reply memo relating to all motions in limine filed 08/22/03 (kvs) (Entered: 09/19/2003)
371 Order granting [370-1] stipulation motion Stip to extend time until 09/26/03 to serve reply memo relating to all motions in limine filed 08/22/03 signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 09/19/03 cc:atty (kvs) (Entered: 09/19/2003)
372 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate to compel production of documents (kvs) (Entered: 09/24/2003)
373 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in support of [372-1] motion to compel production of documents (kvs) (Entered: 09/24/2003)
374 Affidavit of Mary Anne Q. Wood Re: Discovery Motions and Disputes (kvs) (Entered: 09/24/2003)

30 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003 09/26/2003

375 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [296-1] motion to exclude hearsay evidence in the form of declarations, affidavits, and other written statements (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
376 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [308-1] motion to exclude conciliation failure letters and administrative charges of discrimination (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
377 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [286-1] motion to exclude testimony of undisclosed witnesses and other undisclosed evidence (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
378 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [304-1] motion to equalize peremptory challenges pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1870 (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
379 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [306-1] motion to preclude duplicative testimony by plaintiffs (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
380 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [292-1] motion to exclude evidence of financial condition of dft until entitlement to punitive damages has been established (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
381 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [310-1] motion to exclude testimony of TOnya THompson regarding alleged statement by Pamela Bowen (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
382 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [290-1] motion to exclude testimony and other evidence of or concerning dismissed parties and claims (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
383 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [294-1] motion to exclude evidence regarding unreported acts of coworker sexual harrassment (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
384 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [298-1] motion to exclude medical records of Dr. Carmela Kormanik (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
385 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [300-1] motion to exclude use of various depositions (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
386 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [288-1] motion to exclude testimony of Tom Collins (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
387 Reply by EEOC to response to [282-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning children born out of wedlock (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
388 Reply by EEOC to response to [279-1] motion in limine to exclude testimony from certain dfts witnesses (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
389 Reply by EEOC to response to [270-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning Ms. THompson's Eligibility for Rehire (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
390 Reply by EEOC to response to [266-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence or argument that suggests EEOC altered or destroyed records (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)

31 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

09/26/2003 09/26/2003
09/26/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003
09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003 09/29/2003

391 Reply by EEOC to response to [275-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning intimate personal information of a sexual nature (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
392 Reply by EEOC to response to [273-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence comcerning complaints and charges of discrimination against dfts by employees other than Crystle Collins, Cynthia Harris, Christina Byrne, Lisa Farnsworth, Tonya THompson and Pamela Warfield (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
392 Motion by EEOC in limine to exclude evidence that other female employees were noit victims of harrassment (kvs) (Entered: 09/29/2003)
393 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [312-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding undisclosed and unproduced exhibits (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
394 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [315-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding Jose Mayo (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
395 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [327-1] motion in limine to exclude Martin Gonzales (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
396 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [319-1] motion in limine to exclude certain medical records, [317-1] motion in limine to exclude gynecological and obstetrical records (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
397 Motion by Crystal Collins in limine to exclude newly identified exhibit (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
398 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in support of [397-1] motion in limine to exclude newly identified exhibit (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
399 SEALED DOCUMENT re: Combined Reply Memo in Support of Crystle Collins' Motion in Limine ro exclude evidence regarding her sexual history and in opposition to dfts Motion for introduction of evidence against pla Crystle Collins (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
400 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [333-1] motion to exclude evidence/preclude calling Noel Gardner MD and David Ranks PhD (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
401 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [331-1] motion to exclude Horatio Arias (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
402 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [325-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding arguments of counsel (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
403 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [321-1] motion in limine to exclude certain medical billing and insurance records (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
404 Reply by Crystal Collins to response to [323-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding her at-will employment history (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)
405 Exhibits filed by intervenor-plaintiff Crystal Collins RE: [393-1] response reply in support of motion in limine to exclude evidence re:undisclosed & unproduced exhibits (kvs) (Entered: 09/30/2003)

32 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

09/30/2003 09/30/2003
09/30/2003
10/09/2003 10/09/2003 10/10/2003
10/22/2003 10/22/2003 10/23/2003 10/29/2003 10/29/2003 10/30/2003 11/03/2003

406 Ex parte motion by EEOC to file overlength memo in response to dft's motion for introduction of evidence (jmr) (Entered: 10/01/2003)
407 Reply by EEOC to response to [277-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning "crude language" and actions directed to non-harassers (jmr) (Entered: 10/01/2003)
408 SEALED Response by EEOC to [340-1] motion for evidence under FRCP 412 against plas Crystal Collins, Cindy Harris and Pamela Warfield (jmr) (Entered: 10/01/2003)
409 Memorandum by EEOC in opposition to [372-1] motion to compel production of documents (kvs) (Entered: 10/10/2003)
411 Affidavit of Sandra J. Padegimas (kvs) (Entered: 10/17/2003)
410 SEALED DOCUMENT re: Reply Memorandum in Support of Motion for Introduction of Evidence Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 412 (kvs) (Entered: 10/14/2003)
412 Reply by Sbarros Italian Eate to response to [372-1] motion to compel production of documents (kvs) (Entered: 10/23/2003)
413 Motion by EEOC to extend time for pretrial deadlines and pretrial conference (kvs) (Entered: 10/23/2003)
414 Memorandum by Sbarros Italian Eate in opposition to [413-1] motion to extend time for pretrial deadlines and pretrial conference (kvs) (Entered: 10/24/2003)
Case referred to magistrate under 28:636(b)(1)(A). (kvs) (Entered: 10/29/2003)
415 Order of Reference 636(b)(1)(A) re: motion to compel signed by Dee Benson 10/28/03 (kvs) (Entered: 11/20/2003)
417 Case referred to Judge David Nuffer cc: atty (kvs) (Entered: 11/03/2003)
416 Notice of Hearing filed : Motion hearing set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [397-1] motion in limine to exclude newly identified exhibit, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [392-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence that other female employees were noit victims of harrassment, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [282-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning children born out of wedlock, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [279-1] motion in limine to exclude testimony from certain dfts witnesses, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [277-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning "crude language" and actions directed to non-harassers, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [275-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning intimate personal information of a sexual nature, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [273-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence comcerning complaints and charges of discrimination against dfts by employees other than Crystle Collins, Cynthia Harris, Christina Byrne, Lisa Farnsworth, Tonya THompson and Pamela Warfield, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [270-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning Ms. THompson's Eligibility for Rehire, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [269-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence that other female employees were not victims of sexual harrassment, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [266-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence or argument that suggests EEOC altered or destroyed records, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [329-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding her

33 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

11/10/2003 11/10/2003
11/18/2003
11/25/2003 12/10/2003

sexual history, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [327-1] motion in limine to exclude Martin Gonzales, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [325-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding arguments of counsel, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [323-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding her at-will employment history, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [321-1] motion in limine to exclude certain medical billing and insurance records, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [319-1] motion in limine to exclude certain medical records, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [317-1] motion in limine to exclude gynecological and obstetrical records, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [315-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding Jose Mayo, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [312-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding undisclosed and unproduced exhibits, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [240-1] motion in limine, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [238-1] motion in limine, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [236-1] motion in limine, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [234-1] motion in limine, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [232-1] motion in limine, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [229-1] motion in limine, set for 2:00 12/10/03 for [227-1] motion in limine , Final Pretrial Conference set for 2:00 12/10/03 To be held before Judge Dee Benson cc:atty ( Ntc generated by: DB chambers) (kvs) (Entered: 11/03/2003)
418 Reply by EEOC to response to [413-1] motion to extend time for pretrial deadlines and pretrial conference (kvs) (Entered: 11/12/2003)
419 Objections by Sbarros Italian Eate [418-1] response reply in support of motion to extend remaining pretrial deadlines and pretrial conference date (kvs) (Entered: 11/14/2003)
420 Order granting [372-1] motion to compel production of documents re: Bates-stamped copies for inspection at the hrg 12/10/03 signed by Judge David Nuffer , 11/18/03. cc:atty (ce) (Entered: 11/19/2003)
416 Case referred to Judge David Nuffer cc: atty (blk) (Entered: 11/25/2003)
426 Minute entry: Cnsl present and Crt reviews with cnsl the status of the hearing. Arguments heard on the motions in limine. Crt ruled: [340-1] Motion in limine reserved on ruling until trial [275-1] Motion in limine reserved on ruling until trial [282-1] Motion in limine reserved on ruling until trial [273-1] motion in limine is DENIED. [269-1] motion in limine is DENIED. [277-1] motion in limine is reserved on ruling until trial. [325-1] motion in limine is GRANTED. [329-1] motion in limine is reserved on ruling until trial. [331-1] motion in limine is DENIED. [298-1] motion in limine is denied in part and granted in part. [333-1] motion in limine is taken under advisement. [340-1] motion for evidence under FRCP 412 against plas Crystal Collins, Cindy Harris and Pamela Warfield taken under advisement, [275-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning intimate personal information of a sexual nature taken under advisement, [282-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning children born out of wedlock taken under advisement, denying [273-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence comcerning complaints and charges of discrimination against dfts by employees other than Crystle Collins, Cynthia Harris, Christina Byrne, Lisa Farnsworth, Tonya THompson and Pamela Warfield, denying [269-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence that other female employees were not victims of sexual harrassment, [277-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence concerning "crude language" and actions directed to non-harassers taken under advisement, granting [325-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding

34 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

12/11/2003
12/12/2003 12/12/2003 12/22/2003 12/22/2003 02/13/2004 02/13/2004 02/13/2004 02/13/2004

arguments of counsel [329-1] motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding her sexual history taken under advisement, denying [331-1] motion to exclude Horatio Arias, granting in part, denying in part [298-1] motion to exclude medical records of Dr. Carmela Kormanik, denying [333-1] motion to exclude evidence/preclude calling Noel Gardner MD and David Ranks PhD ; Judge: Dee Benson Court Reporter: Ed Young Court Deputy: Ron Black (rb) Modified on 03/11/2004 (Entered: 12/15/2003)
417 Order denying [333-1] motion to exclude evidence/preclude calling Noel Gardner MD and David Ranks PhD. Intervenor Pla is entitled to the results of Dr. Ranks' testing. Dft shall provide Intv Pla with those results immediately. Dr. Gardner's testimony remains admissible to the extent permitted by this Court's 4/25/03 ruling. Bifurcating the trial as follows: the liability phase will begin as scheduled on 2/2/04; the damages phase may be delayed a reasonable period of follow immediately on the heels of teh damages phase at Intv Pla's option. Signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 12/11/03 cc:atty (tsh) (Entered: 12/11/2003)
Proposed document from Sbarros Italian Eate entitled Memo in Oppsition to plas motion in limine to exclude newly indentified exhibit (kvs) (Entered: 12/15/2003)
421 Motion by Sbarros Italian Eate for leave to file opposition memo out of time, and memo in support thereof (kvs) (Entered: 12/22/2003)
422 Notice of filing by Crystal Collins re: Notice of Withdrawal of Objection to Videotape (kvs) (Entered: 12/23/2003)
423 Memorandum by Crystal Collins in opposition to [421-1] motion for leave to file opposition memo out of time, and memo in support thereof (kvs) (Entered: 12/23/2003)
424 Notice of settlement filed by EEOC, Sbarros Italian Eate (kvs) (Entered: 02/13/2004)
425 Order, dismissing case with prejudice, each party to bear its own costs and attorneys fees See order for details signed by Chief Judge Dee Benson , 2/13/04 cc:atty (kvs) (Entered: 02/13/2004)
Case closed per order no. 425 (kvs) (Entered: 02/13/2004)
CASE NO LONGER REFERRED TO Judge David Nuffer (kvs) (Entered: 02/17/2004)

35 of 36

PACER Login:
Description:

PACER Service Center
Transaction Receipt
06/11/2007 12:04:17

hs0328

Client Code: eeoc

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

2:00-cv-00774-DB

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

CM/ECF - U.S. District Court:utd - Docket Report Billable Pages: 22

https://ecf.utd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?662552211346448-L_35...

Cost:

1.76

36 of 36

6/11/2007 1:02 PM

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,
vs.
TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC. dba SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,
.Qefendant.

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC.

CRYSTLE COLLINS, Plaintiff in Intervention,
vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC. et aI.,
Defendants.

Civil No. 2:00CVOO774B Judge Dee V. Benson Magistrate Judge David Nuffer

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC or Commission") is the Plaintiff ("Plaintiff') in this action against Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery ("Defendant") under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.c. §2000e et seq. ("Title VlI"). Plaintiffs allege Defendant discriminated against Cindy Harris, Christine Byrne, and Crystle Collins, who is also a Plaintiff Intervenor in this matter ("Charging Parties"),

and a class of other women. The class includes Lisa Farnsworth West, Tonya Thompson and Pam Warfield (Charging Parties and class members are collectively referred to herein as "Class Members"), and relief is sought for alleged unlawful sexual harassment and alleged retaliation.
Tri-Spur has at all times vigorously defended this action and continues to assert that it has not engaged in unlawful discrimination, sexual harassment, or retaliation and is agreeing to this Settlement Agreement solely to avoid the cost of trial. The Settlement Agreement does not constitute an admission of liability by the Defendant, nor an adjudication on the merits of the allegations in the Complaint.
Plaintiffs and Defendant do not object to the jurisdiction of the Court over this action and waive their right~ to a hearing and the entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
In the interest of resolving this matter as between the Plaintiffs and Defendant and as a result of having engaged in settlement negotiations, the Plaintiffs and Defendant have agreed that the claims should be resolved finally by filing of this Settlement Agreement and an Order of Dismissal.
It is hereby Agreed by the parties to the foHowing: 1. This Settlement Agreement resolves all claims of the Plaintiffs and Class Members, including but not limited to back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, interest, injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and costs arising out of the issues in this lawsuit. 2. In order to ensure continued compliance with the mandates ofTitJe VD, Defendant agrees that its managers and employees will continue to be advised that workplace sexual harassment is not acceptable conduct. Defendant further agrees to continue to maintain
-2-

for the duration of this Settlement Agreement a policy prohibiting such conduct and setting forth appropriate mechanisms for reporting complaints of harassment to management. Defendant will continue to ensure that applicants and employees complaining of sexual harassment are not suQjecf to discrimination because he or she: (i) opposes or opposed discriminatory practices made unlawful by Title VII; (ii) files or filed a charge of discrimination or assists or has assisted or participates or is participating in the filing of a charge of discrimination; or (iii) assists, assisted, participates or participated in an investigation or proceeding brought under the Federal or State laws prohibiting discrimination or retaliation.
In sum, Defendant will continue to carry out policies and practices that help assure a work environment free from sexual harassment of its employees and that will continue to allow employees to raise concerns or complaints about matters made unlawful by Title VII without retaliation.
3. Defendant shall make payment to Class Members within ten (l0) days of execution of this Settlement Agreement and the execution by all Class Members of individual Settlement Agreements and Releases. The aggregate amount paid to class members shall be the gross sum of Eighty Thousand Dollars ($80,000.00) plus additional consideration as agreed by Plaintiff, Defendant and Class Members. The aggregate ofthe $80,000.00 and additional consideration shall be referred to as the "Settlement Amount.
4. Defendant shall pay the Settlement Amount to the Class Members as set forth in each Class Member's individual Settlement Agreement and Release.
-3-

5. In furtherance of its public education mission, the Commission will issue one press release regarding this case. The press release will acknowledge Defendant's denial of the claims asserted in this action and its continuing commitment to prohibit discrimination. The EEOC win only disclose information that is a matter of court record, including the terms stated in this Settlement Agreement.
6. For two years following the execution of this Settlement Agreement, Defendant agrees to continue posting in its Utah Sbarros Italian Eatery restaurants a copy of its sexual harassment policy. This policy shaH be posted in both Spanish and English at a location in the business frequented by employees.
7. Defendant agrees to continue to provide training to its Utah Sbarros Italian Eatery restaurant employees, supervisors, and managers in the State of Utah on sexual harassment and retaliation.
A. Defendant shaH present once a year in each of Defendant's Utah Sbarros Italian Eatery restaurants a live or a videotaped presentation on the prevention ofsexual harassment. New supervisory personnel shaH view the videotape or attend a Jive training session within thirty days of commencing employment. Defendant may have multiple videotaped training sessions to accommodate staffing needs.
B. The training shaH include the subjects of what constitutes sexual harassment and retaliation; how to provide a work environment free from sexual harassment and retaliation; and to whom and by what means employees may complain if they feel they have been subjected to sexual harassment or retaliation in the workplace.
-4-

8. Defendant's written policies concerning sexual harassment and retaliation (a) shaH continue to conform with the law, including the identification and contact information for specific individuals to whom employees may report alJegations of sexual harassment; (b) shall contain assurances that Defendant will thoroughly investigate sexual harassment allegations promptly, fairly, and impartially; (c) shaH contain assurances that appropriate corrective action will be taken by Defendant to eradicate sexual harassment; and (d) shall be distributed to all employees of Defendant's Utah facilities within thirty (30) days of the approval of this Settlement Agreement, and to new employees when hired. These policies shall be reissued, in English and Spanish, to each employee once a year for the term of this Settlement Agreement.
9. Defendant shall not retain documents related to the investigation of sexual harassment complaints in the personnel file of any employee who complains of harassment. All disciplinary actions taken against employees, supervisors, and managers of Defendant's Utah facilities for violation of Defendant's sexual harassment policy shall be retained in that employee's personnel file when a violation is found and discipline is imposed.
10. Defendant shaH report in writing to the Regional Attorney of the Commission's Phoenix District Office at 3300 N. Central Ave., Suite 690, Phoenix, Arizona 85012, beginning six (6) months from the date of the approval of the Settlement Agreement, and thereafter every six (6) months for the next two years the following information:
A. A copy of Defendant's policies regarding sexual harassment and retaliation.
-5-

B. Any changes, modifications, revocations, or revisions to Defendant's policies which concern or affect the subject of sexual harassment or retaliation.
C. A certification that all employees have received training in accordance with this Settlement Agreement.
D. Confirmation that Defendant's policies have been posted as required by this Settlement Agreement.
11. Except as otherwise provided herein or in the individual Settlement and Release Agreements executed by the Charging Parties, the parties shall each bear their own costs and attorneys' fees.
12. The duration of this Settlement Agreement shall be two (2) years from approval by the Court of this Settlement Agreement. However, the obligations under this Settlement Agreement will terminate earlier if controJling ownership of Defendant's Utah Sbarro's Italian Eatery Restaurants is transferred to any new and non-related owner. The parties agree that this matter can be dismissed upon execution of this Settlement Agreement. A copy of the Order of Dismissal approved by all counsel is attached as Exhibit C. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action for the duration of the Settlement Agreement for the limited purpose of enforcing the Settlement Agreement. During this time Plaintiff, Defendant or any Charging Party may petition this Court for compliance with this Settlement Agreement in accordance with law. This Settlement Agreement shall expire by its own terms at the end of twenty-four months from the date of approval of the Court, without further action by the Court.
-6-

13. The parties agree to submit this Settlement Agreement to the Court for its

consideration and approval by entry of the attached or other Order deemed appropriate by the

Court.

DATED this 2t5~ay of '"Y,k}vU9---~--" 2004.

APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO:
Mary 10 O'Neill C. Emanuel Smith Sandra Padegimas Loretta Medina Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-9688 (602) 640-5061
Attorneys for Plaintiff

III
R erH. H Ie Heather E. orrison Hoole&Kmg 4276 South Highland Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 (801) 272-7556
Attorneys for Plaintiff in Intervention

Mary Anne Q. ood Kathryn O. Balmforth Wood Crapo LLC 60 East South Temple, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 366-6060
Attorneys for Defendant

-7-

Feb-l 0-04 OZ:44P1 FrOll"iEOC L8Ia' . t

SOZ 640 5009

T-326 P.009!OZ6 F-G49

13. The parties agree to submit this Settlement Agreement to the Court for its

considerntion and approval by entry of the anached or other Order deemed appropriate by the

Court.

DATED this _day of

.....). 2004.

APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO:

Mazy Jo O'Neill C. Emanuel Smi
Sandra Padegimas
Loretta Medina
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-9688 (602) 64()..5061
Attorneys for Plaintiff

Roger H. Hoole Heather E. Morrison Hoole & King
4276 South Highland Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 (801) 272-7556
Attorneys for Plaintiffin Intervention

Mary Anne Q. Wood KathIyn O. BaJmfortb Wood Crapo UC 60 East South Temple, Suite 500
Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 366-6060
Attorneys for Defendant

-7-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the I3lh day of February, 2004, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC to be delivered in the manner indicated as follows:

Mary Jo O'Neill (VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL)

C. Emanuel Smith

Sandra J. Padegimas

"_

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Phoenix District Office

3300 N. Central Avenue, Suite 690

Phoenix, AZ 85012-9688

Loretta Medina

(VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL)

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

505 Marquette NW, Suite 900

Albuquerque, NM 87102

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Roger H. Hoole

(VIA HAND DELIVERy)

Heather E. Morrison
Ashby D. Boyle n

Hoole & King, L.c.

4276 S. Highland Drive

Salt Lake City, Utah 84124

Attorneys for Intervening Plaintiff, Crystle Collins

\~~i!t?~~ / I

8

DIS L-::. -j ;_ : ._ •• IN THE UNlTED STATES DISTRICT COURT -, ····.'~:1
H'I': [~~'~'.. ,--:- '~'.--'.' -- .. --
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION: .

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTIJNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff, vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., dba SBARRO'S ITALIAN EATERY,
Defendant.
CRYSTLE COLLINS, Plaintiff in Intervention,
vs. TRI-SPUR INVESTMENT COMPANY, INC., et al.
Defendants.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Civil No. 2:00CV00774B Judge Dee V. Benson Magistrate Judge David Nuffer

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission" or "EEOC") filed this action against Tri-Spur Investment Company, Inc., dba Sbarro's Italian Eatery, to enforce Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. §2000e et~. and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. §1981 (a). Crystle Collins intervened in the action.
The parties have reached a settlement of this matter resolving all claims of the

Commission and Plaintiff-Intervenor against Defendant arising out of the issues in this lawsuit

The terms of the settlement are set forth in the Settlement Agreement attached as Exhibit A.

It is hereby ORDERED that the parties abide by the terms of the attached Settlement

Agreement. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over any action to enforce the Settlement

Agreement for two years following the entry of this Order.

It is further ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice, with each party to

bear its own costs and attorneys' fees incurred in this action as of the date of the entry of this

order.

E-tfra DATED this

Fe y of

br

,2004

BY THE COURT:

i ~ 13~ s ~------...
The Jiinorable Dee V. Benson
United States District Court Judge

-2-

APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO:

Mary 10 O'Neill
C. Emanuel Smith Sandra Padegi~as Loretta Medina Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-9688 (602) 640-5061
Attorneys for Plaintiff

erH. Hole Heather E. orrison Hoole & King 4276 South Highland Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 (801) 272-7556
Attorneys for Plaintiff in Intervention

ood Kathryn O. B fo Wood Crapo LLC 60 East South Temp e, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 366-6060
Attorneys for Defendant

-3-

APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO,.:..

Mary 10 O'Neill C. Emanuel Smith
Sandra Padegimas Loretta Medina Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-9688 (602) 640-5061
Attorneys for Plaintiff

ger H. cole
Heather E. orrison
Hoole&K g 4276 South Highland Drive Salt Lake City, Utah 84124 (801) 272-7556
Attorneys for Plaintiffin Intervention

Mary Anne Q. Wood Kathryn O. Balmforth Wood Crapo LLC 60 East South Temple, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, DT 84 J 11 (801) 366-6060
Attorneys for Defendant

-3-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 131h day of February, 2004, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing ORDER OF DISMISSAL to be delivered in the manner indicated as follows:

Mary Jo O'Neill (VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL) C. Emanuel Smith Sandra J. Padegimas Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Phoenix District Office 3300 N. Central Avenue, Suite 690 Phoenix,PLZ 85012-9688

Loretta Medina

(VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL)

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

505 Marquette NW, Suite 900

Albuquerque, NM 87102

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Roger H. Hoole

(VIA HAND DELIVERY)

Heather E. Morrison

Ashby D. Boyle II

Hoole & King, L.C.

4276 S. Highland Drive

Salt Lake City, Utah 84124

Attorneys for Intervening Plaintiff, Crystle Collins

4

'2/13/04 02:56 PH HST US District Court vin CourtFnx

u.s. DISTRICT COURT - UTAH

To: Fax Phone:

Sandra J. Padegimas
8,602,6405009

From: Phone:

US District Court - Utah (801) 524-6106

fEB 1 :) 2004

Sent on:

02/13/04

Total Pages (including cover):

02:36PMMST 8

Comments: Regarding Case:

2:00-cv-00774

Attached is an order/judgment entered in the above case

If fax transmission is incomplete, please call number above and ask for Ms. Ruth Kawashima.

kvs United States District Court
for the District of Utah February 13, 2004
* * CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE OF CLERK * *
Re: 2:00-cv-00774
True and correct copies of the attached were either mailed, faxed or e-mailed by the clerk to the following:
Ms. Lois A. Baar, Esq.
JANOW BAAR ASSce
9 EXCHANGE PL STE 1112 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 EMAIL
Ms. Mary Anne Q. Wood, Esq. WOOD CRAPO LLC 60 E SOUTH TEMPLE STE 500 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111 EMAIL
Mr. Mark Dalton Dunn, Esq. VICTORIA K KIDMAN & ASSOCIATES 111 E BROADWAY STE 800 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111
Mr. Roger H. Hoole, Esq. HOOLE & KING LC 4276 HIGHLAND DR SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84124 JFAX 9,2727557
Ms. Carlie Christensen, Esq. US ATTORNEY'S OFFICE , 84111 EMAIL
Sandra J. Padeg~s, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ· 85012-1848 JFAX 8,602,6405009
Mary Jo O'Neill, Esq. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION PHOENIX DISTRICT OFFICE 3300 N CENTRAL AVE STE 690 PHOENIX, AZ 85012-1848

Loretta Medina, Esq. EEOC 505 MARQUETTE NW STE 900 ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87102