United States v The Town of West Terre Haute

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

______________________________

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Civil Action No.

THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE,

Defendant.

______________________________

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, United States of America, alleges:

1. This action is brought on behalf of the United States to enforce the provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII").

2. This court has jurisdiction of the action under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) and 28 U.S.C. § 1345.

3. Defendant Town of West Terre Haute, Indiana ("Town of West Terre Haute") is a political subdivision of the State of Indiana, created pursuant to the laws of the State of Indiana.

4. Defendant Town of West Terre Haute is a person within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(a) and an employer within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (b).

5. Defendant Town of West Terre Haute is responsible for establishing the terms, conditions and other practices which bear upon the employment conditions of employees of the Town of West Terre Haute.

6. Ms. Jana Buchanan was employed by Defendant Town of West Terre Haute from October 1998 through August 2000. Former Town Marshal Harry W. Hughes subjected Ms. Jana Buchanan to demeaning and harassing conduct, including, but not limited to: making crude comments about her breasts, body and weight; frequently touching her body; repeatedly suggesting that she was having sexual relations with her co-workers; and making threatening remarks.

7. Defendant Town of West Terre Haute has discriminated against Ms. Jana Buchanan on the basis of her sex, female, in violation of Section 703(a) of Title

http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/emp/documents/wterrehautecmplt.htm

8/13/2007

United States v The Town of West Terre Haute

Page 2 of 3

VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a), among other ways, by:
(a) Creating, maintaining, and condoning sexual harassment and a sexually hostile work environment in the West Terre Haute Police Department;
(b) Subjecting Ms. Jana Buchanan to sexual harassment during her employment at the West Terre Haute Police Department, which created an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment and which adversely affected the terms, conditions and privileges of Ms. Jana Buchanan's employment;
(c) Subjecting Ms. Jana Buchanan to sexual harassment during her employment at the West Terre Haute Police Department which created an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment which was so intolerable that it caused her to resign her position; and
(d) Failing or refusing promptly and effectively to investigate, remedy or prevent the conduct described in Paragraphs 6(a)-(c).
8. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) received a timely charge, Charge No. 240-A1-0356, filed by Ms. Jana Buchanan. She alleges that she had been discriminated against in employment by Defendant Town of West Terre Haute on the basis of her sex (female). The EEOC investigated the charge, pursuant to Section 706 of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5, found reasonable cause to believe that the allegations of discrimination were true, attempted to achieve through conciliation a voluntary resolution of the charge, and subsequently referred the matter to the Department of Justice when such conciliation efforts proved unsuccessful.
9. All conditions precedent to the filing of this suit have been performed or have occurred.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff United States prays that the Court grant the following relief:
(a) Award Ms. Jana Buchanan equitable relief, including an offer of reinstatement with appropriate retroactive seniority and compensatory damages as would fully compensate her for injuries caused by Defendant Town of West Terre Haute's discriminatory conduct against her, pursuant to and within the statutory limitations of Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1981a;
(b) Require Defendant Town of West Terre Haute to take other appropriate nondiscriminatory measures to overcome the effects of the discrimination, including the implementation of an effective program to: address and prevent sexual harassment against female employees in the Police Department as well as all other female employees employed by the Town of West Terre Haute; ensure that employees with sexual harassment allegations are not discouraged from bringing forth their complaints; and ensure that all complaints of sexual harassment, including those made to supervisors, are promptly and objectively

http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/emp/documents/wterrehautecmplt.htm

8/13/2007

United States v The Town of West Terre Haute

Page 3 of 3

investigated and resolved; and
(c) Award such other additional relief as justice may require, together with Plaintiff's costs and disbursements in this action.
JURY DEMAND
The United States hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.
John D. Ashcroft
Attorney General
By:
Ralph F. Boyd, Jr. Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division
John M. Gadzichowski [WI Bar # 1014294] Deputy Chief Benjamin Blustein [DC Bar # 418930] Amanda Rocque [NY Bar (no number issued)] Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Employment Litigation Section Patrick Henry Building, Fourth Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Telephone: (202) 514-4073
Susan W. Brooks United States Attorney Southern District of Indiana
Sue Hendricks Bailey Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of Indiana 10 West Market Street Suite 2100 Indianapolis, IN 46204

http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/emp/documents/wterrehautecmplt.htm

8/13/2007

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.
THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE, Defendant.

)Civil Action No. 2:03-cv-0206

)

JDT-WGH

)

)

)

)

)

CONSENT DECREE This action was brought by the United States against the Town of West Terre Haute, Indiana ("Town"), to enforce the provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., as amended ("Title VII"), following receipt by the United States from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") of a charge of discrimination filed by Jana Buchanan (EEOC Charge No. 240-A1-0356). This Court has jurisdiction of the action under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e5(f) and 28 U.S.C. § 1345. In its Complaint, the United States alleges that the Town discriminated against Jana Buchanan, a female formerly employed

1

by the Town's Police Department ("Police Department"), because of her sex, in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII, among other ways, by:
(a) Creating, maintaining, and condoning sexual harassment and a sexually hostile work environment in the Town's Police Department;
(b) Subjecting Ms. Buchanan to sexual harassment during her employment with the Town's Police Department, which created an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment and which adversely affected the terms, conditions and privileges of her employment;
(c) Subjecting Ms. Buchanan to sexual harassment during her employment with the Town's Police Department, which created an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment which was so intolerable that it caused her to resign her position; and
(d) Failing or refusing promptly and effectively to investigate, remedy or prevent the sexual harassment.
The Town denies that it has discriminated against Ms. Buchanan in violation of Title VII. Nevertheless, the United States and the Town, desiring that this action be settled by an appropriate Consent Decree, and without the burden and risks of
2

protracted litigation, agree to the jurisdiction of this Court over the parties and the subject matter of this action. The United States and the Town also hereby waive, for purposes of this Consent Decree only, hearings and findings of fact and conclusions of law on all issues, and further agree to the entry of this Consent Decree as final and binding between them with regard to the issues raised in the Complaint filed by the United States in this case.
This Consent Decree, being entered into with the consent of the United States and the Town, shall in no way constitute an adjudication or finding on the merits of the case, nor be construed as an admission by the Town or a finding of any wrongdoing or violation of any applicable federal law or regulation.
Lastly, the date of entry of the Consent Decree shall be the date on which the Court approves and enters this Consent Decree as an order of the Court.
It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: GENERAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1. The Town, by and through its officials, agents, employees and all persons in active concert or participation with the Town in the performance of employment or personnel
3

functions, shall not engage in any act or practice that

discriminates against any employee or applicant for employment

because of that employee's or applicant's sex in violation of

Title VII.

2. The Town shall not retaliate against or in any way

adversely affect the terms and conditions of employment of any

person because that person has opposed any practice made

unlawful by Title VII, filed a charge with the EEOC, or

testified, assisted or participated in any manner in an

investigation, proceeding or hearing under Title VII, including

this case or this Consent Decree.

3.

Within thirty (30) days from the date of entry of

this Consent Decree, the Town shall provide the United States

with a proposed written policy governing sexual harassment for

the Town's Police Department. That proposed policy shall

include at least the following provisions:

(a)

Police Department employees may submit complaints of

sexual harassment to a supervisor, the Town Marshal or

directly to the Town Council;

(b)

All complaints of sexual harassment, including those

made to or about supervisors or the Town Marshal, will

be promptly and objectively investigated by the Town

4

Council; (c) The results of any investigation into a complaint of
sexual harassment will be provided to the complaining party, as well as to the alleged harasser, no later than thirty (30) days from the date the complaint was made; and (d) The Town will maintain the confidentiality of any complaint of sexual harassment, except to the extent that disclosure of a complaint and the alleged supporting facts is necessary to the investigation and resolution of such complaint. 4. Within thirty (30) days from the date of its receipt of the Town's proposed written policy governing sexual harassment for the Town's Police Department, the United States shall provide written notification to the Town as to whether the United States believes the Town's proposal complies with Paragraph 3 above. If the United States notifies the Town that the United States believes that the Town's proposal does not comply with Paragraph 3 above, the parties shall have thirty (30) days to agree upon a revised written policy, after which time either party may submit the issue to this Court for resolution.
5

5. Within thirty (30) days from the date that a revised written policy governing sexual harassment for the Town's Police Department has been agreed to by the United States and the Town or, absent agreement, ordered by this Court, the Town shall: adopt and implement such policy; publicize that revised policy by posting it in all Police Department facilities which are commonly used for posting notices; and distribute a copy of that revised policy to each full-time and part-time employee of the Town's Police Department.
6. The Town thereafter shall ensure that each new Police Department employee receives a copy of the revised written policy governing sexual harassment for the Town's Police Department at the time of the new employee's hire. Each new Police Department employee shall sign an acknowledgment that she or he has read and understood the sexual harassment policy, and this acknowledgment shall be placed in each employee's personnel file.
7. During the life of this Consent Decree the Town shall retain all documents received or generated by the Town, its officials, agents or employees, that relate to complaints against the Town's Police Department or any of its employees of: discrimination in employment on the basis of sex; retaliation as
6

defined in Paragraph 2 above; or the Town's investigation and/or

resolution of any such complaints.

8. The United States shall have the right to inspect and

copy any documents that are relevant and necessary to monitor

the Town's compliance with this Consent Decree, including, but

not limited to, any confidential documents outlined in Paragraph

7 above, upon thirty (30) days notice to the Town and without

further order of this Court.

SPECIFIC REMEDIAL RELIEF

9.

Without admitting the allegations of the United

States as set forth in its Complaint, and in settlement of the

claims of the United States for relief on behalf of Ms.

Buchanan:

(d) The Town shall offer to pay Ms. Buchanan a monetary

award of forty-three thousand dollars ($43,000.00).

This award shall be considered to be compensatory

damages, as would fully compensate her for injuries

caused by the Town's alleged discriminatory conduct

against her, pursuant to and within the statutory

limitations of Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of

1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a. No portion of this award is

to be considered as backpay or wages. No withholdings

may be made by the Town from this award, although the

7

Town shall issue an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 1099-Misc Form to Ms. Buchanan and report this award to the IRS and any other applicable taxing authority. (e) No later than ten (10) days from the date of entry of this Consent Decree, the Town shall notify Ms. Buchanan of the terms of this Consent Decree by mailing to her, by certified mail, return receipt requested, a copy of this Consent Decree, a notice letter in the form set forth in Appendix A hereto, and a copy of a release in the form set forth in Appendix B hereto. The Town shall send a copy of the notice letter referred to herein to the United States at the same time it sends such notice letter to Ms. Buchanan. 10. In order to receive the relief offered her by the Town under this Consent Decree, Ms. Buchanan must execute the release form provided with the notice letter and return it to the Town within thirty (3D) days from the date she receives the notice letter. 11. The Town shall provide the United States with a copy of Ms. Buchanan's executed release form within ten (10) days after its receipt thereof. Within ten (10) days from the date
8

of its receipt of Ms. Buchanan's executed release form, the Town shall mail to her a certified or bank check made payable to Jana Buchanan in the amount of forty-three thousand dollars ($43,000.00). If Ms. Buchanan fails or refuses to execute the release form, she waives any and all right to receive any relief under this Consent Decree, but she does not waive her right to intervene in this cause of action on her own behalf.
DISPUTES 12. The parties to this Consent Decree shall attempt to resolve informally any disputes that may occur under this Consent Decree. If the United States and the Town are unable to reach agreement after informally seeking to resolve a dispute, the issue may be submitted by either party to the Court for resolution upon at least thirty (30) days written notice to the other party. 13. All documents required to be delivered under this Consent Decree by the Town to the United States shall be sent by express mail to the attention of:
Chief Employment Litigation Section Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice 601 D. Street, N.W., Room 4040 Washington, D.C. 20004 14. All documents required to be delivered under this
9

Consent Decree by the United States to the Town shall be sent by express mail to the attention of:

Jeremy Dilts, Esq. Miller, Carson, Boxberger & Murphy 3100 John Hinkley Place, Suite 106 Bloomington, IN 47408

RETENTION OF JURISDICTION

15. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this Consent

Decree and this cause of action for the purposes of implementing

the relief provided herein, and resolving any disputes or

entering any orders that may be necessary to implement the

relief provided herein.

16. This Consent Decree shall dissolve and this cause of

action shall be dismissed, without any further order of this

Court, at the end of one year from the date of its approval and

entry by the this Court.

17. The United States and the Town shall bear their own

costs in this action, including attorney's fees, except that the

parties shall retain the right to seek costs for any matter

which, in the future, may arise from this Consent Decree and

require resolution by the Court.

IT is so ORDERED, this

day of --------------, 2004.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 10

AGREED AND CONSENTED TO:

For plaintiff United States of America:

R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division

BY:~ '~5~

~

.

JOHN M. GADZICHOWSKI [WI Bar # 1014294]

Deputy Chief

BENJAMIN BLUSTEIN [DC Bar # 418930]

SARA LEWENBERG [MA Bar # 634257]

Attorneys

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Employment Litigation Section

PHB, Fourth Floor

Washington, D.C. 20530

Telephone: (202) 514-4073

For defendant Town of West Terre Haute:
kJ!~
Town of West Terre Haute

BOXBERGER & MURPHY

s, Esq. Lipta Esq./#9821-02 Hin e Place, Ste. 106 Bloomington, IN 47408 Telephone: (812) 333-1225 Facsimile: (812) 333-1925

11

APPENDIX A

VIA CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Jana Buchanan 129 N. 8th Street West Terre Haute, IN 47885

Re: United States of America v. Town of West Terre Haute; Civil Action No. 2:03-cv-0206 (S.D.IN)(J.Tinder)

Dear Ms. Buchanan:

The United States and the Town of West Terre Haute ("Town") have entered into a

Consent Decree settling the case of United States v. Town of West Terre Haute, Civil Action No.

2:03-cv-0206. A copy ofthe Consent Decree, which was approved and entered by the Honorable

John D. Tinder, United States District Judge in the Southern District of Indiana on

, IS

enclosed.

Pursuant to the Consent Decree, the Town is offering to pay you $43,000.00, to compensate you for your claims of discrimination. You should be aware that all or a portion of the monetary amount may be subject to federal, state and/or local income tax, for which you will be responsible.

In order to receive the reliefthe Town is offering, you must execute the enclosed Release and return it, within thirty (30) days of your receipt ofthis letter, to the Town's counsel at:

Jeremy Dilts, Esq. Miller, Carson, Boxberger & Murphy 3100 John Hinkle Place, Suite 106 Bloomington, IN 47408

The Town will pay the entire monetary amount offered to you within ten (10) days of its receipt of your executed Release.

If you fail to timely provide the Town with the executed Release, or if you decline the relief offered by the Town, the Town will nevertheless have satisfied its obligation to the United States pursuant to the Consent Decree.

If you have any questions concerning the Consent Decree or the Town's offer to you, you may contact one of the following attorneys at the U.S. Department of Justice:

Enclosure

Benjamin Blustein Sara Lewenberg Senior Trial Attorneys Employment Litigation Section Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20530 (202) 514-4073 .
Sincerely,
Jeremy Dilts, Esq.

APPENDIXB RELEASE OF ALL CLAIMS

For and in consideration of the acceptance of all or any part of the relief offered to me by

the Town of West Terre Haute ("Town"), pursuant to the provisions ofthe Consent Decree

entered by the Honorable John D. Tinder, United States District Judge for the Southern District

of Indiana, on

in United States v. Town of West Terre Haute, Civil Action

No.2:03-cv-0206, I, Jana Buchanan, forever release and discharge the Town, and all current,

former and future agents, employees, officials, designees, predecessors and successors in interest

from all legal and equitable claims, arising out of the Complaint filed in the above-captioned

civil action and EEOC charge number 240-AI-0356, accrued prior to the date ofthis release. I

further agree that I will not institute a civil action or seek to intervene against the Town in any

pending civil action alleging employment discrimination on the basis of EEOC charge number

240-AI-0356, or any other EEOC charges filed against the Town before the date of this release,

or the Complaint in Civil Action No. 2:03-cv-0206, or any of the facts alleged in EEOC charge

number 240-AI-0356 or any other EEOC charge, as amended, or Complaint filed before the date

ofthis release against the Town and/or any of its agents, employees, officials, designees, and

predecessors and successors in interest.

I acknowledge that a copy of the Consent Decree in this action has been made available to me for my review.

I HAVE READ THIS RELEASE AND UNDERSTAND THE CONTENTS THEREOF, AND I EXECUTE THIS RELEASE OF MY OWN FREE ACT AND DEED.

Signed this _ _ _ day of_ _ _ _, 2004.

JANA BUCHANAN

Social Security No. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Subscribed and sworn to before me this

______ day of

,2004

My Commission expires:_ _ _ __

Notary Public

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

UNITED STATES,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

vs.

)

)

TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE,

)

)

Defendant.

)

Civil No. 203-CV-02(16 - WGH

ANSWER

Comes now defendant, Town of West Terre Haute, by counsel, and for its Answer to

plaiutiffs Complaint, says:

Answer to Specific Allegations

1-2. Defendant is without knowledge or iuformation sufficient to admit 0' deny the truth

of the allegations of paragraphs I and 2; therefore, those allegations are denied.

3. Defendant admits the allegations of paragraph 3.

4. Defendant is wiithout knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the truth

of the allegations of paragraph 4; therefore, those allegations are denied.

5. Defendant admits the allegations of paragraph

6. Defendant adrnilts that Ms. Jana Buchanan was employed by the Town ofWest Terre

Haute from October 1998 through August 2000. The defendant denies all other allegations in

plaintiffs paragraph 6.

7. Defendant denies the allegations of paragraph 7.

8-9. Defendant is willhout knowledge or information sufficient to admit or deny the truth

of the allegations of paragraphf: 8 and 9; therefore, those allegations are denied.

WHEREFORE, defendant, Town ofWest Terre Haute, respectfully request; that the plaintiff take nothing by way of its complaint, and for ail other just and proper relief in the premises.
Additional Defenses For its further and affirmative defenses, defendant states the following: 1. Plaintiffmay have failed to mitigate her damages, as may be shown by the evidence. 2. Plaintiff has no damages. 3. The defendant may not be an "employer" as required by 42 U.S.C.l2000E(b). 4. Plaintiffmay have failed to comply with all precedent conditions prior to following suit, as may be shown by the evidence. 5. Plaintiff's claims may be barred by the doctrines of waiver and estoppel, as may be shown by the evidence. WHEREFORE, defendant, Town of West Terre Haute, respectfully requests ti1at the plaintiff take nothing by way of its complaint and for all other just and proper relief in the p;·emises.
Respectfully submitted,

3100 John Hinkle Place, Suite 106 Bloomington, Indiana 47408 Telephone: (812) 333-1225

By:_.k;q..,,~~=:::::::....,-_ _ _ _ __
efendant, Town of est Terre Haute

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I do hereby certifY that on this the 12th day of September, 2003, a copy of the above and foregoing document was m21iled by United States Mail, first class postage prepaid, to: Amanda Rocque, Esq., Benjamin Blustein, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Employment Litigation Section, PHB 4908, Washington. DC 20530; and Susan W. Brooks, Esq., Sue Hendricks Bailey, Esq., Office ofthe U.S. Attorney, 10 West Market Street, Suite 2100, Indianapolis, IN 46204.
3\buchanan\federal\appearance.ejl. wpd

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v. TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE, IN
Defendant.

Civil Action No. 203-CV-0206 JDT-WGH

CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN

I. Parties and Representatives A. Plaintiff United States:

Counsel from the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice will have primary responsibility for handling this matter on behalf of the United States.

Benjamin Blustein [DC Bar No. 418930]

Sara R. Lewenberg [Mass. Bar No. 634257]

Attorneys

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation Section

U.S. Mail Address:

Overnight Mail Address:

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

601 D Street, N.W.

Patrick Henry Building, Room 4908

Room 4908

Washington, D.C. 20530

Washington, D.C. 20004

Telephone: (202) 514-4073

Facsimile: (202) 514-1005

E-mail: Benjamin.Blustein@usdoj.gov

Sara.Lewenberg@usdoj.gov

Sue Hendricks Bailey Assistant United States Attorney Southern District of Indiana 10 West Market Street, Suite 2100 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 226-6333 Facsimile: (317) 226-5027

E-Mail: sue.bailey@usdoj.gov
B. Defendant Town of West Terre Haute:
Jeremy M. Dilts, Esq./#22335-49 Edward J. Liptak, Esq./#9821-02 Miller Carson Boxberger & Murphy, LLP 3100 John Hinkle Place, Suite 106 Bloomington, IN 47408 (812) 333-1225 phone (812) 333-1925 fax jmd@mcbm.com eil@mcbm.com
II. Synopsis of the Case
A. Plaintiff United States:
The United States alleges that the Town of West Terre Haute (“Town”) unlawfully discriminated against former employee Jana Buchanan in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., by subjecting her to sexual harassment that resulted in a hostile work environment and her constructive discharge. Specifically, the United States alleges that the former head of the Town’s Police Department, Harry W. Hughes, repeatedly subjected Ms. Buchanan to harassing and unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature, including, but not limited to, unwanted touching, obscene gestures, lewd comments about her sexual partners, crude comments about her body, and threatening remarks.
The Town is a covered “employer” under Title VII because it had “fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks” in the years in which the alleged discrimination occurred or the preceding calendar year. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b). The Town filed certified reports with the State of Indiana pursuant to Chapter 100, Acts of 1943, indicating that the Town employed well over 15 individuals during each year from 1998 through 2000.
B. Defendant Town of West Terre Haute:
The Complaint, filed on July 11, 2003, alleges a violation of Jana Buchanan’s civil rights under Title VII based on the alleged sexually-hostile work environment in the West Terre Haute Police Department.
Town contends that (1) Ms. Buchanan was not subjected to any sexual
2

harassment, (2) that she has not sustained any economic damages because she left her employment for a higher-paying job, and (3) that the Town did not have enough employees to be considered an “employer” under 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e).
III. Pre-Trial Pleadings and Disclosures1
A. The parties shall serve their FED. R. CIV. P. 26 initial disclosures on or before October 11, 2003, and shall at that time file a notice with the Court that such disclosures have been served. [Note: Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1)(E) permits the parties to object to making initial disclosures or to stipulate to a different deadline for making such disclosures based upon the circumstances of the action. If any objection and/or stipulation is made to initial disclosures in the CMP, the parties shall briefly state the circumstances justifying their respective positions.]
B. Plaintiff shall file preliminary witness and exhibit lists on or before November 11, 2003.
C. Defendant shall file preliminary witness and exhibit lists on or before December 11, 2003.
D. All motions for leave to amend pleadings and/or to join additional parties shall be filed on or before November 11, 2003.
E. Plaintiff shall serve Defendant (but not file with the Court) a statement of special damages, if any, and make a settlement demand, on or before November 11, 2003. Defendant shall serve on Plaintiff (but not file with the Court) a response thereto within 15 days after receipt of the demand.
F. Plaintiff shall disclose the name, address, and vita of all expert witnesses, and shall serve the report required by FED. R. CIV. P. 26(a)(2)(B) on or before [Plaintiff proposes: January 11, 2004; Defendant proposes: August 11, 2004]. However, if Plaintiff uses expert witness testimony at the summary judgment stage, such disclosures must be made no later than 60 days prior to the summary judgment deadline.
G. Defendant shall disclose the name, address, and vita of all expert witnesses, and shall serve the report required by FED. R. CIV. P. 26(a)(2)(B) within 30 days after Plaintiff serves its expert witness disclosure; or if none, Defendant shall make its expert disclosure on or before [Plaintiff proposes: February 11, 2004;
1 Those dates and deadlines regarding which the parties were unable to reach agreement appear in bold. The parties’ respective proposed pre-trial schedules are summarized in the chart set forth in Attachment A to this Case Management Plan.
3

Defendant proposes: September 11, 2004]. However, if Defendant uses expert witness testimony at the summary judgment stage, such disclosures must be made no later than 30 days prior to the summary judgment deadline.
H. Any party who wishes to limit or preclude expert testimony at trial shall file any such objections no later than 60 days before trial. Any party who wishes to preclude expert witness testimony at the summary judgment stage shall file any such objections with their responsive brief within the briefing schedule established by Local Rule 56.1.
I. All parties shall file and serve their final witness and exhibit lists on or before [Plaintiff proposes: February 11, 2004; Defendant proposes: September 11, 2004].
J. Any party who believes that bifurcation of discovery and/or trial is appropriate with respect to any issue or claim shall notify the Court as soon as practicable.
IV. Discovery and Dispositive Motions
Due to the time and expense involved in conducting expert witness depositions and other discovery, as well as preparing and resolving dispositive motions, the Court requires counsel to use the CMP as an opportunity to seriously explore whether this case is appropriate for such motions (including specifically motions for summary judgment), whether expert witnesses will be needed, and how long discovery should continue. To this end, counsel must select the track set forth below that they believe best suits this case. If the parties are unable to agree on a track, the parties must: (1) state this fact in the CMP where indicated below; (2) indicate which track each counsel believes is most appropriate; and (3) provide a brief statement supporting the reasons for the track each counsel believes is most appropriate. If the parties are unable to agree on a track, the Court will pick the track it finds most appropriate, based upon the contents of the CMP or, if necessary, after receiving additional input at an initial pretrial conference.
A. Does any party believe that this case may be appropriate for summary judgment or other dispositive motion? If yes, the party(ies) that expect to file such a motion must provide a brief statement of the factual and/or legal basis for such a motion. [Note: A statement such as, “Defendant will seek summary judgment because no material facts are in dispute,” is insufficient. Such a statement does not indicate to the Court that the parties used the CMP as an opportunity to seriously explore whether this case is appropriate for summary judgment or other dispositive motion. However, the failure to set forth a basis for a dispositive motion in the CMP will not bar a party from raising this argument at the motions stage.]
4

Plaintiff United States:
No. The United States submits that this case is not appropriate for summary judgment because Defendant Town of West Haute disputes that Jana Buchanan was subjected to sexual harassment and, therefore, a jury must determine contested factual matters. To the extent that Defendant asserts that it may file a dispositive motion based upon its contention that it may not be an “employer” under Title VII because it had fewer than 15 employees during the relevant period, extensive discovery on this issue is not required. Therefore, the United States proposes that any dispositive motions be filed by January 11, 2004.
Defendant Town of West Terre Haute:
Yes, the Town of West Terre Haute anticipates a possible dispositive motion based on the inapplicability of Title VII requirements to it. The Town may not be an “employer” as defined by Title VII.

B. Select the track that best suits this case:

X (Plaintiff)

Track 1: All discovery shall be completed2 by March 30, 2004, pursuant to the proposed schedule set forth in Attachment A. [Note: The United States requests a shorter discovery track because the factual allegations are straightforward, and expert witnesses are not anticipated. If Defendant intends to file a dispositive motion based upon its assertion that may not be an “employer” under Title VII, that motion shall be filed by January 11, 2004.]

X (Def.)

Track 2: Dispositive motions are expected and shall be filed by June 11, 2004; non-expert witness discovery and discovery relating to liability issues shall be completed by May 11, 2004; expert witness discovery and discovery relating to damages shall be completed by November 11, 2004. [Note: The Court expects this will be the typical track when dispositive motions are anticipated.]

2 The term “completed,” as used in Section III.B, means that counsel must serve their discovery requests in sufficient time to receive responses before this deadline. Counsel may not serve discovery requests within the 30-day period before this deadline unless they seek leave of Court to serve a belated request and show good cause for the same. In such event, the proposed belated discovery request shall be filed with the motion, and the opposing party will receive it with service of the motion but need not respond to the same until such time as the Court grants the motion.
5

____

Track 3: Dispositive motions are expected and shall be filed no later than _____________ [no later than 11 months from Anchor Date]; expert witness discovery that may be necessary at the dispositive motions stage shall be completed by ___________ [no later than 7-10 months from Anchor Date]; all remaining discovery shall be completed by [no later than 12-16 months from Anchor Date]. [Note: The Court expects that this will not be the typical track when dispositive motions are anticipated.]

____ Track 4: Dispositive motions shall be filed by _________ [not later than 13 months from the Anchor Date]; non-expert discovery shall be completed by __________; expert witness discovery shall be completed by __________. [Note: The Court provides Track 4 as an open option because it recognizes that there may be unusual cases for which special circumstances necessitate additional flexibility. However, the Court has found that Tracks 1-3 are appropriate in the large majority of cases, and therefore the parties must briefly state below the special circumstances justifying a departure from Tracks 1-3.]
__________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________

V. Pre-Trial/Settlement Conferences
Plaintiff United States:
The United States is amenable to an initial conference with the Magistrate Judge or District Judge, either in person or by telephone, to explore ways to resolve this matter by settlement and minimize the costs associated with litigation.
Defendant Town of West Terre Haute:
Should Defendant’s anticipated dispositive motion not be successful, the parties believe a settlement conference with the Magistrate would be helpful.

VI. Trial Date Plaintiff United States:
The presumptive trial date is January 2005, which is18 months from the Anchor Date. However, the United States requests a shorter discovery track and earlier trial date for the reasons set forth in Part IV. The United States requests a trial date in May 2004. The
6

trial is by jury and is anticipated to take 2-3 days.
Defendant Town of West Terre Haute:
The presumptive trial date is January, 2005. The trial is by jury and is anticipated to take 2-3 days.
VII. Referral to Magistrate Judge
It is the long-standing policy and practice of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice in prosecuting actions brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq., to have the case assigned to a District Judge for trial rather than consent to trial by a Magistrate Judge. Therefore, Plaintiff does not consent to refer this matter to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and FED. R. CIV. P. 73.
VIII. Required Pre-Trial Preparation
A. TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE FINAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE, the parties shall:
1. File a list of witnesses who are expected to be called to testify at trial.
2. Number in sequential order all exhibits, including graphs, charts and the like, that will be used during the trial. Provide the Court with a list of these exhibits, including a description of each exhibit and the identifying designation. Make the original exhibits available for inspection by opposing counsel. Stipulations as to the authenticity and admissibility of exhibits are encouraged to the greatest extent possible.
3. Submit all stipulations of fact in writing to the Court. Stipulations are always encouraged so that at trial counsel can concentrate on relevant contested facts.
4. A party who intends to offer any depositions into evidence during the party’s case-in-chief shall prepare and file with the Court and copy to all opposing parties either:
a. brief written summaries of the relevant facts in the depositions that will be offered. (Because such a summary will be used in lieu of the actual deposition testimony to eliminate time reading
7

depositions in a question and answer format, this is strongly encouraged.); or
b. if a summary is inappropriate, a document which lists the portions of the deposition(s), including the specific page and line numbers, that will be read, or, in the event of a video-taped deposition, the portions of the deposition that will be played, designated specifically by counter-numbers.
5. Provide all other parties and the Court with any trial briefs and motions in limine, along with all proposed jury instructions, voir dire questions, and areas of inquiry for voir dire (or, if the trial is to the Court, with proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law).
6. Notify the Court and opposing counsel of the anticipated use of any evidence presentation equipment.
B. ONE WEEK BEFORE THE FINAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE, the parties shall:
1. Notify opposing counsel in writing of any objections to the proposed exhibits. If the parties desire a ruling on the objection prior to trial, a motion should be filed noting the objection and a description and designation of the exhibit, the basis of the objection, and the legal authorities supporting the objection.
2. If a party has an objection to the deposition summary or to a designated portion of a deposition that will be offered at trial, or if a party intends to offer additional portions at trial in response to the opponent’s designation, and the parties desire a ruling on the objection prior to trial, the party shall submit the objections and counter summaries or designations to the Court in writing. Any objections shall be made in the same manner as for proposed exhibits. However, in the case of objections to video-taped depositions, the objections shall be brought to the Court’s immediate attention to allow adequate time for editing of the deposition prior to trial.
3. File objections to any motions in limine, proposed instructions, and voir dire questions submitted by the opposing parties.
4. Notify the Court and opposing counsel of requests for separation of witnesses at trial.
8

IX. Other Matters
None. Respectfully submitted this 9th day of October, 2003,
On behalf of the United States of America:
s/ Benjamin Blustein Benjamin Blustein [DC Bar # 418930] Sara R. Lewenberg [Mass Bar No. 634257] Attorneys U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation Sctn. 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Patrick Henry Building, Room 4908 Washington, D.C. 20530 Benjamin.Blustein@usdoj.gov Telephone: (202) 514-4073 Facsimile: (202) 514-1005
On behalf of the Town of West Terre Haute:
MILLER CARSON BOXBERGER & MURPHY 3________________________________________ Edward J. Liptak, Esq./#9821-02 3100 John Hinkle Place, Ste. 106 Bloomington, IN 47408 Telephone: (812) 333-1225 Facsimile: (812) 333-1925
3 On October 8, 2003, counsel for Defendant represented its consent to the filing of this Case Management Plan.
9

Attachment A

PROPOSED DEADLINES

Event Initial Disclosures (FRCP 26)

Pl.’s Proposed Date October 11, 2003

Def.’s Proposed Date October 11, 2003

Pl.’s Preliminary Witness & Exhibit Lists

November 11, 2003

November 11, 2003

Def.’s Preliminary Witness & Exhibit Lists

December 11, 2003

December 11, 2003

Mot. for Leave to Amend Pleadings and/or Join Parties

November 11, 2003

November 11, 2003

Pl.’s Statement of Special Damages & Settlement Demand

November 11, 2003

November 11, 2003

Pl.’s Expert Witness Disclosures January 11, 2004

August 11, 2004

Def.’s Expert Witness Disclosures

February 11, 2004

September 11, 2004

Final Witness & Exhibit Lists

February 11, 2004

September 11, 2004

Non-Expert Witness Discovery Deadline

March 30, 2004

May 11, 2004

Expert Witness Discovery Deadline

March 30, 2004

November 11, 2004

Dispositive Motions Deadline

January 11, 2004

June 11, 2004

Trial Date

May 2004

January 2005

10

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

____________

PARTIES APPEARED IN PERSON/BY COUNSEL ON _____________ FOR A PRETRIAL/STATUS CONFERENCE.

____________

APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.

____________

APPROVED AS AMENDED.

____________

APPROVED AS AMENDED PER SEPARATE ORDER.

____________

APPROVED, BUT ALL OF THE FOREGOING DEADLINES ARE SHORTENED/LENGTHENED BY ______________ MONTHS.

____________

APPROVED, BUT THE DEADLINES SET IN SECTION(S) _______________ OF THE PLAN IS/ARE SHORTENED/LENGTHENED BY ______________ MONTHS.

____________ ____________

THIS MATTER IS SET FOR TRIAL BY ___________ ON ___________ _____________________________. FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE IS SCHEDULED FOR _______________________________________ AT _______________ .M., ROOM ________________.
A SETTLEMENT/STATUS CONFERENCE IS SET IN THIS CASE FOR ____________________________ AT __________ .M. COUNSEL SHALL APPEAR:
_________ IN PERSON IN ROOM _______________; OR
_________ BY TELEPHONE, WITH COUNSEL FOR ________________ INITIATING THE CALL TO ALL OTHER PARTIES AND ADDING THE COURT JUDGE AT (____) ___________________.
_________ BY TELEPHONE, WITH COUNSEL CALLING THE JUDGE’S STAFF AT (_____) ____________________.

____________

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL BE FILED NO LATER THAN

11

.___________________________________________________________ ___________________
______________________________________________________________________________ ___ ______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________

________________________ Date

___________________________________ U. S. District Court Southern District of Indiana

Form Approved June 2003
12

Certificate of Service I hereby certify that on October 9, 2003, a copy of the foregoing Case Management Plan was filed electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent to the following parties by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system.
Plaintiff United States of America I hereby certify that on October 9, 2003, a copy of the foregoing Case Management Plan was mailed, by first class mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed to the following:
Edward J. Liptak, Esq. Miller Carson Boxberger & Murphy, LLP 3100 John Hinkle Place, Ste. 106 Bloomington, IN 47408
s/ Benjamin Blustein Benjamin Blustein [DC Bar # 418930] Attorney U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation Sctn. 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Patrick Henry Building, Room 4908 Washington, D.C. 20530 Benjamin.Blustein@usdoj.gov Telephone: (202) 514-4073 Facsimile: (202) 514-1005
13

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
TERRE HAUTE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff

vs.
THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE,
Defendant

2:03-cv-206-JDT/WGH

ORDER DIRECTING FILING OF A PLEADING AUTHORIZING DISMISSAL

The court has been advised by counsel that a settlement has been reached in this action. All that remains to be done is the execution of documents and/or delivery of funds, if so required, in accordance with their agreement. Therefore, all pending motions, if any, are now DENIED AS MOOT and all previously ordered dates relating to discovery, filings, schedules, conferences and trial, if any, are VACATED. The Settlement Conference scheduled for February 10, 2004 at 10:00 a.m. before Magistrate William Hussmann is also VACATED.
IT IS ORDERED that within thirty (30)days of this date, counsel for the plaintiff shall file a motion to dismiss this cause or a stipulation of dismissal and submit an order for the court's signature ordering the dismissal of this action (in conformance with the agreement of the parties). Failure to comply with this order will result in DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

pursuant to Rule 41(b), Fed. R. Civ. P. for failure to prosecute this action in a timely manner. Additional time to complete the execution of the settlement document may be granted if requested in writing prior to the expiration of this period of time.
ALL OF WHICH IS ORDERED this 6 th day of February, 2004.

J

iel Tinder, Judge

U

States District Court

Copies to:
Benjamin Blustein Sara Rachel Lewenberg US Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, NC 20530
Sue Bailey Asst. U.S. Attorney 10 W. Market Street, Suite 2100 Indianapolis, IN 46204
Edward J. Liptak Jeremy M. Dilts MILLER ARSON BOXBERGER & MURPHY, LLP 3100 John Hinkle Place, Suite 106 Bloomington, IN 47408
Hon. William G. Hussmann

-2-

 
 U.S. District Court Southern District of Indiana (Terre Haute) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:03-cv-00206-JDT-WGH

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE Assigned to: Judge John Daniel Tinder Referred to: Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann, Jr Cause: 42:2003 Job Discrimination

Date Filed: 07/11/2003 Date Terminated: 03/09/2004 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Plaintiff
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

represented by Amanda Adams Rocque US DEPT OF JUSTICE Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation 930 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20530 202-514-2375 Fax: 202-514-1005 Email: amanda.rocque@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Benjamin Blustein US DEPT OF JUSTICE Civil Rights Division, Employment Litigation 950 Pennsylvanie Ave NW Washington, DC 20530 202-514-4073 Fax: 202-514-1005 Email: benjamin.blustein@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sara Rachel Lewenberg U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE, CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20530 202-514-2168 Fax: 202-514-1005 Email: sara.lewenberg@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sue Hendricks Bailey UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 10 West Market Street Suite 2100 Indianapolis, IN 46204-3048 (317) 226-6333 Fax: (317) 226-6125 Email: carrie.griffin@usdoj.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE

represented by Edward J. Liptak CARSON BOXBERGER 3100 John Hinkle Place Suite 106 Bloomington, IN 47401 (812) 333-1225 Fax: (812) 333-1925 Email: liptak@carsonboxberger.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Jeremy Michael Dilts CARSON BOXBERGER 3100 John Hinkle Place Suite 106 Bloomington, IN 47408 (812) 333-1225 Fax: (812) 333-1925 Email: dilts@carsonboxberger.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 07/11/2003
07/11/2003

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT against THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE with Jury Demand, filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)

2 CIVIL COVER SHEET by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

07/11/2003 07/11/2003 07/11/2003 07/11/2003 07/11/2003 07/11/2003 07/11/2003 07/25/2003
07/25/2003
07/25/2003 07/25/2003 07/28/2003
07/28/2003 08/15/2003

(VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)
3 Summons Issued as to THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE. (VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)
4 DEMAND for Trial by Jury by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. (VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)
5 NOTICE of Appearance by Benjamin Blustein on behalf of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)
6 NOTICE of Appearance by Amanda Rocque on behalf of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)
7 NOTICE of Appearance by Sue Hendricks Bailey on behalf of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)
8 MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S Summary of CMP Notice (VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)
9 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction (VS, ) (Entered: 07/11/2003)
10 RETURN of Service by CMRRR c/o Dennis Stark THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE served on 7/15/2003. signed by Samantha Buck(VS, ) Modified on 7/25/2003 (VS, ). (Entered: 07/25/2003)
11 RETURN of Service by CMRRR c/o Lawrence Beck THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE served on 7/15/2003. signed by vicki Ashburn(VS, ) Modified on 7/25/2003 (VS, ). (Entered: 07/25/2003)
12 RETURN of Service by CMRRR Jerry Menestrina THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE served on 7/15/2003. signed by vicki Ashburn(VS, ) (Entered: 07/25/2003)
13 RETURN of Service by CMRRR Clarence Beck THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE served on 7/15/2003. signed by Vicki Ashburn(VS, ) (Entered: 07/25/2003)
14 NOTICE of Parties' First Extension of Time; defendants shall have to and including 08/29/03 to respond to complaint, by THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE cs (VS, ) (Entered: 07/28/2003)
15 NOTICE of Appearance Edward J. Liptak and Jeremy M. Dilts for defendant THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE, cs (VS, ) (Entered: 07/28/2003)
16 SUBPOENA to US Equal Employment Opportunity by THE

08/29/2003 09/03/2003 09/15/2003 10/08/2003 10/09/2003 10/15/2003 10/16/2003 10/16/2003
10/17/2003 10/21/2003 10/21/2003

TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE. (VS, ) (Entered: 08/15/2003)
17 MOTION for Extension of Time to File answer to plaintiff's complaint by THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE.cs (VS, ) (Entered: 08/29/2003)
18 ORDER granting defendant's 17 Motion for Extension of Time within which to answer or otherwise plead . Signed by Judge William G. Hussmann Jr. on 09/03/03. cm (NKD, ) (Entered: 09/03/2003)
19 ANSWER to Complaint by THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE.cs(VS, ) (Entered: 09/15/2003)
20 NOTICE of Appearance by Sara R. Lewenberg on behalf of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. (EAH, ) (Entered: 10/09/2003)
21 CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN TENDERED by all parties. (Blustein, Benjamin) (Entered: 10/09/2003)
22 NOTICE of Service of Initial Disclosures, cs by THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE (VS, ) (Entered: 10/15/2003)
23 ORDER: CASE MANAGEMENT Approved as modified at section IV B Track 2 deadlines shall apply. Signed by Judge William G. Hussmann Jr. on 10/16/03. (VS, ) (Entered: 10/16/2003)
SCHEDULING ORDER: Jury Trial set for 11/15/2004 09:30 AM in room #215 before John Daniel Tinder. Settlement Conference set for 2/10/2004 10:00 AM in room #210 before Magistrate Judge William G. Hussmann Jr.; motions to dismiss or for summary judgment raising issue if defendant is an "employer" shall be filed by 02/15/04.. Signed by Judge William G. Hussmann Jr. on 10/16/03. (VS, ) (Entered: 10/16/2003)
24 NOTICE of Service of Initial Disclosures to Defendant on 10/09/03 by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (Blustein, Benjamin) (Entered: 10/17/2003)
25 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Harry W. Hughes by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 10/21/2003)
26 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Clarence Beck by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 10/21/2003)

10/21/2003 10/21/2003 11/05/2003 11/20/2003 11/20/2003 11/20/2003 11/20/2003 11/20/2003 12/04/2003 12/04/2003 12/04/2003 12/10/2003

27 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Larry Beck by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 10/21/2003)
28 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Jerry Menestrina by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 10/21/2003)
29 REVISED NOTICE to Take Deposition of Harry W. Hughes by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) Modified on 11/6/2003 (TMD). (Entered: 11/05/2003)
30 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Clarence Beck by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 11/20/2003)
31 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Larry Beck by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 11/20/2003)
32 NOTICE to Take Deposition of Jerry Menestrina by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 11/20/2003)
33 Notice of Service of REQUEST for Production of Documents by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) Modified on 1/5/2004 (Carpentier, Wendy). (Entered: 11/20/2003)
34 Notice of Service of First Set of Interrogatories to Defendant (Nos. 1-23) by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.(Lewenberg, Sara) Modified on 1/5/2004 (Carpentier, Wendy). (Entered: 11/20/2003)
35 DISCOVERY Preliminary Witness and Exhibit Lists by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. (Attachments: # 1 preliminary exhibit list)(Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
36 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Preliminary Witness and Exhibit Lists (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
37 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Demand for Settlement to Defendant (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/04/2003)
38 Exhibit List, Witness List Prelimianry by THE TOWN OF WEST TERRE HAUTE. cs(VS, ) (Entered: 12/10/2003)

12/16/2003 12/16/2003 12/17/2003 12/17/2003 12/17/2003 12/17/2003 12/17/2003 01/12/2004 02/09/2004
03/05/2004 03/05/2004

39 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of service of responses to defendant's first set of interrogatories.(Lewenberg, Sara) Modified on 12/16/2003 (JMC). (Entered: 12/16/2003)
40 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Responses to Defendant's First Set of Requests for Documents (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/16/2003)
41 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Deposition Notice of Stephen Creasey (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/17/2003)
42 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Deposition Notice of Ernest Meeks (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/17/2003)
43 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Deposition Notice of Sandra Giles (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/17/2003)
44 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Deposition Notice of Melody Buchanan (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/17/2003)
45 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Deposition Notice of Tamala Parsons (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 12/17/2003)
46 NOTICE by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA of Service of Expert Disclosure Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(A) (Lewenberg, Sara) (Entered: 01/12/2004)
47 ORDER directing filing of pleading authorizing dismissal; all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT; all previously ordered dates relating to discovery, filings, schedules, conferences and trial are VACATED; Settlement Conference scheduled for 02/10/04 is VACATED; IT IS ORDERED that within 30 days of this date, counsel for plaintiff shall file a motion to dismiss or stipulation of dismissal; failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal with prejudice . Signed by Judge John Daniel Tinder on 02/06/04. cm(NKD, ) Additional attachment(s) added on 2/12/2004 (NKD, ). (Entered: 02/10/2004)
48 Joint MOTION for Approval and Entry of Consent Decree by all parties. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Consent Decree)(Blustein, Benjamin) (Entered: 03/05/2004)
49 BRIEF/MEMORANDUM in Support re 48 Joint MOTION for

03/09/2004

Approval and Entry of Consent Decree filed jointly by the parties filed by UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. (Blustein, Benjamin) (Entered: 03/05/2004)
50 CLOSED DISMISSED consent decree; parties to bear own costs, including attorney fees except that parties shall retain right to seek costs for any matter in future may arise from this consent decree and require resolution by court. Signed by Judge John Daniel Tinder on 03/09/04. cm(VS, ) (Entered: 03/11/2004)