Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 1 of 25 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Traci Radmanovich, Martha Mausshardt,

)

Brenda Palmer, Vicky Miller, Maria Eason,

)

Elke Budreau, Bonnie Shaffer, Patricia Schams )

Terry Boebel, and Cathy Aloffo, on behalf of

)

themselves and others similarly situated,

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

v.

)

)

Combined Insurance Company of America,

)

)

Defendant.

)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
950
JUDGtiSUCKW
MAIG!STRATJE JUDGE KEYS

COMPLAINT-- CLASS ACTION Plaintiffs complain of defendant as follows:

ooclflTtP

Dtc

1

3

u
loo1

I. Defendant Combined Insurance Company of America ("Combined") sells

supplemental insurance products to more than 5 million customers throughout the United States

and Canada. It has also engaged in a shocking campaign of cruel, severe and pervasive sexual

harassment and economic discrimination against its female workforce. Male managers and sales

agents inflicted sex-related abuse on female employees that ranged from verbal taunting to a

gang-bang style rape. Women were propositioned for sex, groped, and constantly touched

against their will. Male managers and sales agents openly discussed the sexual value of women's

body parts and clothing. Women were interrogated about their sex lives and forced to endure

constant speculation about their sexual proclivities and performance. Men made sexual jokes,

bantered endlessly about the sex they were having (or wished to have) and otherwise created a

sex-filled, sex-charged environment that reinforced the idea of women as sexual prey.

2. An offshoot of its institutionalizing the humiliation and degradation of its female

workforce was Combined's refusal to offer female employees the same opportunities it offered to

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 2 of 25 PageID #:2
'
males. Women were paid less, forced to strictly adhere to performance standards, given worse assignments, and rarely promoted.
3. The men who operated Combined helped to create and maintain the fraternity party atmosphere. When they were not themselves assaulting, propositioning or otherwise harassing women, male managers were covering up for other male employees. No complaint fazed Combined management. When a female sales agent complained that she was forcibly raped by several male sales agents and managers while she lay unconscious, a senior manager instructed her to have an abortion to avoid having to determine which guy was the father.
4. Combined has failed and refused to take the issues of sexual harassment and economic discrimination seriously. Combined not only refuses to discipline or stop harassers and discriminators-some are actually promoted. Combined's cavalier attitude toward the women it employs has prompted plaintiffs to bring this action seeking injunctive, compensatory, punitive and other relief for themselves and others similarly situated.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because this action arises under the laws of the United States. 6. Venue in this district is proper under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(3) and 28 U.S. C.§ 139l(b) and (c) because the unlawful employment practices occurred in this district and the defendant resides in this judicial district. Combined maintains its corporate office in Glenview, Illinois.
2

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 3 of 25 PageID #:3
PARTIES 7. Plaintiffs Traci Radmanovich, Martha Mausshardt, Brenda Palmer, Vicky Miller, Maria Eason, Elke Budreau, Bonnie Shaffer, Patricia Schams Terry Boebel, and Cathy Aloffo, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, are all current or former female sales employees of Combined Insurance Company of America. Each plaintiff and class member is an "employee" for purposes of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(f). 8. Defendant Combined Insurance Company of America, a wholly owned subsidiary of AON Corporation, sells supplemental health, accident and life insurance products throughout the United States and Canada through a large, nationwide group of sales employees. Combined's sales staffis overseen by tiers of managers who are closely supervised and overseen in every respect by Combined top management in Chicago, Illinois, where Combined maintains its national headquarters. Combined is an "employer" for purposes of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(b), because it is engaged in interstate commerce and employs fifteen or more employees.
FACTS A. The Philosophy and Culture of Combined Insurance 9. Combined has one business pursuit: selling insurance. Everything at Combined is focused on that one goal and everyone who works at Combined either sells insurance or supports the people who sell insurance. 10. Combined was founded by W. Clement Stone in 1919. The principles he developed are still the cornerstone of the firm's operations. Stone believed that a sales force must be motivated emotionally as well as financially, and devised a system of on-going motivational programs which are used to this day under the rubric of the "Positive Mental
3

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 4 of 25 PageID #:4
Attitude." Combined operates on a strict "pyramid" system, in which virtually all managerial hiring is done by promotion from within, and every manager must start at the bottom. Today, virtually every top manager, including the chief executive officer, started as a sales agent, the lowest entry level position at the company. Every one of these individuals was trained and schooled in the W. Clement Stone "success system that never fails," and each personally participated in the system still in use and in which plaintiffs and the plaintiff class are routinely and repeatedly abused in teirns ofpromotions, compensation opportunities and also subjected to the most egregious kinds of sexual harassment without protest, control or condemnation by top management.
11. Thus, the top managers of the company today in the course of their careers (and they are all men) personally prospered and succeeded in the same culture of sexual discrimination and abuse as exists today. To them, the Combined culture is synonymous with the Combined system and maintaining this culture--despite its propensity to sexual abuse and discrimination-is the way, indeed the only way, to run the company. As a result, none of the top executives, despite personal awareness both of the sorts of events here complained of and the requirements of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, has or will take effective steps to bring this lawless system into compliance with the laws of the United States.
B. The Structure of Combined Insurance 12. Every newly hired sales agent is trained in the Combined method of selling insurance and part of this training is morale boosting to the point of indoctrination, which has resulted in a company culture of fierce pride in the Combined way of doing things. At local, regional and national meetings, called "Ardmores," Combined's philosophy ofthe Positive Mental Attitude is preached and reinforced. Managers tout Ardmores as controlled environments
4

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 5 of 25 PageID #:5

where family and other obligations do not distract employees from their goals. Newly hired sales

agents are steeped in Combined culture during these Ardmores by their bosses and their bosses'

bosses, all of whom were themselves sales agents who rose up through the ranks. The intense

Combined culture breeds loyal employees whose devotion to Combined and the Combined

tradition sometimes borders on the cult-like.

13. One result of Combined's single focus-selling insurance-and insistence on

accomplishing this goal in only one way-the Combined way-is an amazingly successful business

that has lasted more than eighty years. Another result is counterintuitive: a company that

conducts its business door to door-without offices-and throughout the fifty states but retains the

cohesion and focus of a one office business. This "one office feel" is reinforced by Combined's

rigid pyramid-style of management.

14. Combined sells insurance in 12 geographical regions spanning the United States

and Canada and each of these regions is managed by a Divisional Manager or Vice

President/Divisional Manager who reports directly to the president and chief executive of the

company, Richard Ravin. The divisions are divided into regions, which are supervised by

Regional Managers. These high ranking managers are overwhelmingly male. As of 1998, the

gender breakdown was:

Title

Number Male

Female

President

1

1

0

Divisional Managers

12

12

0

Regional Managers

76

73

3

5

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 6 of 25 PageID #:6
Regions are divided into sub-regions and sub-regions are in tum divided into districts or territories and managed by District Managers ("DMs"), now called Territorial Directors ("TDs"). DMs and TDs hire sales agents to sell insurance in their district.
15. Sales agents all work under the same written contract, and all sell insurance on commission. Once they meet certain selling and training criteria, sales agents are supposed to receive an automatic promotion to Customer Sales Manager or New Business Manager, which offers increased commission opportunities. This criteria is not uniformly applied; DMs or TDs can accelerate or delay a promotion despite this "automatic" promotion policy.
16. A Customer Sales Manager becomes eligible for promotion to a District Manager or Territorial Director position when he or she sells a "grand diamond," a certain amount of insurance sold in a set time period. In reality, some Customer Sales Managers are promoted without ever selling a grand diamond and others are not promoted despite selling one or more grand diamonds. In other words, upper level managers make subjective decisions about who to promote into middle management.
17. In an atmosphere like Combined's-with male sexual aggression and constant sex stereotyping-the subjective decisions almost always favor the men or disfavor the women. This reality is reflected in the numbers: in 1998, women held only 3 of the 89 upper management positions.
C. Economic Discrimination Claims 18. Combined proclaims that it is an equal opportunity employer, that it pays and promotes based on merit, not on seniority or favoritism. However, Combined has done nothing to keep its promise. It has ignored numerous complaints about disparate treatment, shruggedat the gross under representation of women in management, and promoted men known to be
6

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 7 of 25 PageID #:7
harassers and discriminators. In truth, Combined has an unspoken policy of excluding women from upper management and other lucrative opportunities.
19. Combined discriminates against women beginning with the hiring process, grading female applicants by their appearance and body type. Women they did not consider attractive were often denied a second interview without any regard to their qualifications or experience. A male Regional Manager evaluated female applicants in a management meeting with demeaning physical descriptions like "great legs," "nice tits," and "great ass." District Manager Maria Eason was instructed not to hire women with children. Another of the plaintiffs was propositioned by a Sub-regional Manager when she interviewed for a job.
20. The sex stereotyping that marked the hiring process continued when women were hired into Combined. Male managers demeaned and humiliated women by painting them as stupid or incompetent. Women were frequently the target of public screaming and yelling over minor or non-existent problems. One male Territorial Director declared that women were good for only a few things-keeping his shirts ironed, supper on the table and sex. A male Regional Manager held a conference call for the managers working under him, during which he instructed them, "If any of you guys ever hire another woman, I will fire you. Do you guys understand? I mean no women, they are so goddamn dumb."
21. Rampant sex stereotyping in an environment of subjective decision making had a predictable effect: women received shoddy training, inferior commission opportunities, lower pay and fewer promotional opportunities. As a result, women made less money than similarly situated men. Plaintiff Patricia Schams was practically ignored by her manager while he was assigned to provide her with field training. During the same time, he was providing assistance, advice and support for the male sales agents he was training. He also skimmed profitable
7

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 8 of 25 PageID #:8
business from Schams while he was supposed to be training her. Another male manager credited a male sales agent with renewal business plaintiff Bonnie Shaffer had already renewed.
22. Male managers also manipulated the rules to ensure women were paid less than men. From the time she moved from commission to salary, plaintiff Terri Boebel was paid less than her male colleagues. HerDivisional Manager even forced her to account for her commissions in a unique way that resulted in a loss to her bottom line. He also refused to assign Boebel additional territory despite her success in her existing territory and the longstanding policy of rewarding successful district managers with additional territories. Combined twice assigned her poorly performing counties staffed by male managers at the end of a cycle, essentially moving their losses to her bottom line. Boebel was ultimately demoted and replaced by a male employee who was less qualified and the subject of several sexual harassment complaints.
23. Plaintiff Vicky Miller had a similar experience. She and a male employee were the co-directors of management development and each were given 6 months to achieve certain goals. At the end of the 6 months, Miller met the goals while her male colleague did not. Her Divisional Manager nonetheless made her male colleague the sole director of management development and demoted her without even an interview. He later explained that since she had children, he assumed she could not travel.
24. Plaintiff Bonnie Shaffer was forced to meet unwritten insurance-writing requirements that her male colleagues were not. When she did not meet these additional, arbitrary requirements, she was demoted.
25. Plaintiff Martha Mausshardt was pushed to perform extra duties for less compensation when her Regional Manager forbid her to use one of her subordinates to perform
8

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 9 of 25 PageID #:9
ministerial duties related to training and hiring, instead insisting she do it all herself. Later, Combined stripped her of several valuable areas in her territory, depriving her of thousands of dollars in revenue. She ultimately suffered a heart attack and while she was recovering, she was replaced. He proceeded to give her successor (a male) much of the territory he had taken from her.
26. Plaintiff Maria Eason climbed to the position of Sub-regional manager only to have her Atlanta territory stripped away and replaced with less valuable eastern Georgia cities. This random reassignment cost her at least $250,000 in premium base.
D. Discrimination in Promotions 27. Combined had a pattern or practice of discriminating against women in making promotion decisions. Traci Radmanovich was one of the few women to enter management. In approximately August 1997, Radmanovich, a District Director, was assigned to a historically under producing district. During her first six months, she improved her territory dramatically and became eligible for an $8,000 bonus. Her Divisional Manager refused to give her the bonus. Radmanovich fought for and eventually received the bonus, a pattern she was forced to repeat every time she was denied equal treatment. 28. Radmanovich endured a shocking amount of harassment, even as a manager. She had to sit through meetings with pornographic movies playing. Her Regional Manager and Divisional Manager continually commented on her body or sex life. Other managers made lewd remarks or propositioned her at conferences and meetings. While pornography played during one meeting, her Regional Manager looked over at her and said, "Now, Princess, I don't have to get a set of ear plugs for you so you can work as a TD [Territorial Director] with us, do I?"
9

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 10 of 25 PageID #:10
29. Notwithstanding the harassment and discrimination, Radmanovich had a banner year in 1998. She ranked 3rd in the nation in accident insurance increases and 7th in overall insurance increases. She received a bonus (after fighting for it) and was asked to speak at the national Territorial Directors meeting. That same year, a Sub-regional Manager position opened in Iowa, where Radmanovich had previously worked. Combined gave that job to a male who ranked 14th in accident insurance and 18th in overall insurance increases. Six months later, a Sub-regional position opened in Illinois. That position was given to a male who ranked 9th in accident insurance and 13th in overall insurance increases. Radmanovich was ultimately demoted to sales agent.
30. Brenda Palmer also rose to Territorial Director at Combined and, like Radmanovich, continued to experience harassment and discrimination. Palmer was promoted in mid-1999 but received no training or assistance from her Sub-regional or Regional Managers. Her male peers were receiving support in recruiting and other areas crucial to their success. Combined did not even list Palmer as a Territorial Director until March 2000.
31. Palmer was treated differently-and worse-than the male Territorial Directors in other ways. She was required to attend almost every hiring and training seminar while males were permitted to skip many of these seminars so they could concentrate on selling. After requiring her to attend these seminars, Combined criticized her for lowered sales, cut her salary by $20,000 and cut her commission. She was publicly berated for seeking excusal from two meetings while her male colleagues regularly skipped "required" meetings. Meanwhile, she was forced to endure endless sexual harassment from her male colleagues and superiors.
32. Palmer's experience is strikingly similar to Radmanovich's in another way. Like Radmanovich, Palmer was refused a promotion to a Sub-regional Manager in favor of a less
10

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 11 of 25 PageID #:11
qualified male. Males with her experience are now Regional or even Divisional Managers. Palmer continues to languish at the Territorial Director position.
33. Maria Eason rose to the position of Sub-regional manager before being halted. Within the same month, Combined stripped her of her profitable territory and denied her a promotion without even an interview. Eason was subsequently denied a second promotion, which was handed to a male District manager with much less experience.
34. District Manager Terri Boebel was demoted for no apparent reason and when another District Manager position opened in 2000, a far less qualified male was hired. Vicky Miller had a similar experience. She was demoted from a Sub-regional Manager position, and then demoted again to District Manager. In the meantime, less qualified men were elevated to Sub-regional Manager and Regional Manager positions.
E. Sexual Harassment and Hostile Work Environment 35. Tucked several pages into Combined's employee manual is its brief sexual harassment policy, which provides that it is the company's policy to prohibit harassment on the · basis of sex. Employees who "feel" sexually harassed are advised to go to their Regional Manager or Human Resources. 36. The sexual harassment policy is notable for what it does not contain. The most recent policy available to plaintiffs does not guarantee confidentiality or an impartial investigation and provides for no formal appeal process. It lacks not only a "No Tolerance" provision, but is devoid of any mention of the appropriate sanction for sexual harassment. 37. In practice, Combined's policy was and is a sham. Combined had constructive and actual knowledge that its male employees were harassing its female employees. It was occurring at nearly every meeting and Ardmore right in front of high-ranking managers. In many
11

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 12 of 25 PageID #:12
cases, the managers themselves participated or encouraged the harassment. Little, if anything, was ever done about it.
38. Combined had the same abysmal response when women complained. The company either ignored the complaints or, when that didn't work, punished the cqmplainers. In a few isolated cases, when the conduct was particularly egregious, a manager would be relocated (but riot demoted).
39. Combined teaches its sales agents how to sell insurance through extensive classroom and field training in the Combined method of selling insurance. All new sales agents begin their employment by attending a three week training session at a regional training facility and this is often where the harassment and discrimination begins. The sales school trainers harassed female sales agents to the point of pressuring them to play sex games. One sales trainer grabbed at a plaintiffs breasts and underwear when she attended. During a 2000 game of strip poker, the trainers warned the female trainees that if they complained, the trainers would accuse the complainers of making sexual advances toward them.
40. Classroom training is augmented by seven weeks of field training and followed by periodic training seminars. Male managers used these opportunities to prey on female sales agents. For example, a District Manager terrorized one of the plaintiffs under the guise of field training. He once arrived drunk at her Illinois home, pinned her to the refrigerator, grabbed her breasts and her buttocks and tried to kiss her. When she complained to his boss, her manager threatened that she better "watch herself' and continued to harass her.
41. Harassment also occurred at training seminars. During a 1999 seminar, a Regional Manager asked one of the plaintiffs, "Why don't you go in and put your head on [her
12

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 13 of 25 PageID #:13
Divisional Manager] and he'll give you anything you want." This Regional Manager also commented that "you women could hardly contain yourself around [their Divisional Manager]."
42. Combined did not maintain offices. Instead, sales agents and Customer Sales Managers ("CSMs") sold insurance by meeting with clients at their homes or in restaurants or other public places. Similarly, Combined managers met with sales agents and CSMs in restaurants or hotels. During this type of required interaction, male managers harassed women who worked under their supervision. For example, a manager harangued one plaintiff about her sex life with her boyfriend, discussed her sex life during sales meetings and constantly made sex jokes in her presence. When female manager Terri Boebel suffered a heart attack, he told this plaintiff it was because she (Boebel) was not getting enough sex. A Divisional Manager asked another plaintiff to have sex with him.
43. As horrible as it was for female employees to endure their supervisors' advances and harassment in the field, it was much worse at Ardmores and other company-sponsored conferences. Agents and managers were required to attend various Ardmores and conferences, which were held in hotels and characterized by drug use and excessive drinking. Sexist and demeaning behavior and comments were commonplace. Male managers and agents openly glared at attractive female agents or commented on their appearance. The theme of one District Manager's Congress was professional football and featured a scantily dressed all-women cheerleading team. One Territorial Director pulled down a female's skirt and kissed her during that conference.
44. Male managers and sales agents bragged about their sexual exploits, made sex jokes, laughed about women's bodies and sex lives and made crude sexual gestures. During one Ardmore, a Divisional Manager told Brenda Palmer's husband that she had the "best tits" in the
13

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 14 of 25 PageID #:14 ---~-------~---~--
company. During another, a Sub-regional Manager bragged, "when I masturbate, I can save it and frost a cake because there is so much." At a Grand Diamond Ceremony, a District Manager pulled his penis out of his pants. A Regional Manager suggested to Vicky Miller that she might need to satisfY his sexual yearnings if he didn't rush home to his wife.
45. Combined management did not stop at verbal taunting and abuse. During a late 1998 Ardmore in Illinois, the Regional Manager required the new female agents under his supervision to sit on his lap. He once pulled one of the plaintiffs onto his lap and told her to "ask Uncle Roger what you want, baby. You can have anything you want." He advised a plaintiff that the only reason her husband had a job at Combined was because he (the Regional Manager) liked her. During a Wisconsin Ardmore, a District Manager constantly put his arms around one of the plaintiffs and rubbed her shoulders. At a later Ardmore, this District Manager asked a her boyfriend for permission to "fuck" her. It was while attending a Grand Diamond ceremony that four male Combined employees, including two District Managers, raped one of the plaintiffs as she lay unconscious in her hotel room. Her Regional Manager later told her that if she pressed charges, the men would portray her as a whore who consented to have sex with them.
F. Combined's Tolerance of the Discrimination and Harassment 46. As described in paragraphs 18 and 35-37, Combined had feeble sexual discrimination and sexual harassment policies that lacked the procedures needed to ensure confidentiality, protection and efficacy. In practice, the policies did not even live up to their meager promises. When then-Territorial Director Traci Radmanovich discovered that a sales school trainer was harassing female sales agents, she reported it to upper management. Nothing was done. When Radmanovich fired a male sales agent under her supervision for harassing female employees, Combined hired him back. During an Ardmore, a female sales agent was
14

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 15 of 25 PageID #:15
traumatized when a District Manager forced her to watch him have sex "doggy-style" with another female. The matter was raised with her Divisional Manager, who responded, "We can't tell 'em what to do after hours, just pretend you don't know-forget about it. Shit happens all the time and you're not going to change it." Another manager's response mirrored this sentiment: "You aren't going to change this type of behavior on the road in the company because if we did, there would not be too many people left in the company, especially since it's mostly management doing this."
47. Women who pushed the matter were threatened, pushed out or punished. When Bonnie Shaffer took her complaints about her District Manager to her Regional Manager, she was demoted from sales manager to sales agent. When Traci Radmanovich brought the complaints of the female agents under her supervision to management and added her own harassment and promotion complaints, her Divisional Manager demoted her from Territorial Director to sales agent. Brenda Palmer was warned that, due to her filing a charge of discrimination against the company, Combined was looking for a way to terminate her. After Patricia Schams complained that she was harassed, she was taunted and subjected to further harassment. When Elke Budreau filed her charge of discrimination, her Regional Manager threatened that if she did not withdraw it, her fiancee's and her career would be threatened. She and her fiancee were harassed and scrutinized until they resigned.
48. Combined could easily have remedied the problems plaguing its female employees. It self-consciously used its frequent Ardmores and other conferences to propagate its company culture and could easily have seized on these opportunities to make it clear that it would not tolerate harassment. In a top-down management structure like Combined's, a simple commitment from upper management would have made the policy meaningful. Instead,
15

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 16 of 25 PageID #:16
Combined's refusal to interfere with the rampant harassment made it clear that the policy was illusory and, in fact, the company condoned the conduct of its male employees. It left female employees with two options: put up with the harassment or quit.
49. Just as Combined knew or should have known that its female employees were being harassed, it knew or should have known that women were not receiving equal treatment with respect to hiring, pay, promotions, and other terms and conditions of employment. The harassment alone should have alerted the company that women were not treated as equals. The gross under representation ofwomen in management was another obvious sign of unequal treahnent. As with the harassment, Combined did nothing and hoped no one would notice.
G. The Damage Caused by Combined 50. The environment created and tolerated by Combined has caused injury to the named plaintiffs and the plaintiff class. These injuries include severe humiliation, mental anguish, and other forms of emotional distress, leading them in many cases to seek psychotherapeutic treatment and in some cases resulting in emotional breakdowns. Many were prescribed medication for depression or anxiety. 51. The continuing abuse and discrimination plaintiffs have suffered has impeded their ability to do their job, deprived them of promotional opportunities, training, equal pay and resulted in discriminatory discipline, demotion, transfer and other adverse employment actions. 52. Some of the plaintiffs have suffered physical injury as the result of the abusive conditions in which they have been forced to work and the abusive behavior of their male colleagues and supervisors. One plaintiff even suffered a heart attack. 53. The abusive working conditions at Combined were sometimes so severe that plaintiffs were forced to resign their positions, resulting in lost pay and benefits.
16

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 17 of 25 PageID #:17
CLASS ALLEGATIONS 54. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(a) and (b)(2), Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of a Plaintiff class against Combined. The Plaintiff class consists of all women who work or have worked in the sales force or management of Combined at any time since April30, 1999. The plaintiff class, which numbers in the hundreds, is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. 55. There are questions of fact and law common to the Plaintiff class. The predominant common questions include (A) whether Combined has permitted a sexually hostile atmosphere to exist; (B) whether Combined has maintained a pattern or practice of failing to respond appropriately to complaints of sexual harassment by its female employees; (C) whether Combined has maintained a pattern or practice of economic discrimination against women; (D) whether Combined's failure to remedy the discrimination warrants punitive damages; and (E) the appropriate injunctive and monetary relief. 56. Plaintiffs' claims are typical of the claims of the class members. Each is based on the same legal and factual theories. Moreover, each of the plaintiffs filed a timely charge with the Illinois Department of Human Rights or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging the classwide discrimination each complains of, and this suit is commenced within 90 days of receipt by each plaintiff of a right to sue letter from the Commission. 57. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class. 58. Certification of the Plaintiff class pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(2) is appropriate in that Combined has applied a common practice to the entire class, and thus declaratory and final injunctive relief against such practices are appropriate.
17

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 18 of 25 PageID #:18
59. Certification is also appropriate pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(3) in that common questions predominate over any questions affecting only individual class members. Further, a class action in this instance is superior to other available methods for the fair and effective adjudication of this controversy.
COUNT I CLASSWIDE CLAIM OF SEX DISCRIMINATION AGAINST COMBINED
UNDER TITLE VII. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e 60. Count I incorporates by reference the above allegations. 61. Plaintiffs bring this count individually and as a class action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a), (b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of a class consisting of all women employed by Combined. 62. Combined has willfully violated and continues willfully to violate 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. through the discriminatory practices complained of above, to the detriment of the individual plaintiffs and the plaintiff class. These practices are part of a pattern or practice of racial discrimination and constitute a continuing violation. Named plaintiffs Traci Radmanovich, Martha Mausshardt, Brenda Palmer, Vicky Miller, Maria Eason, Elke Budreau, Bonnie Shaffer, Patricia Schams Terry Boebel, and Cathy Aloffo have filed timely class-wide charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, received right to sue letters from that agency and filed this suit no more than 90 days after receipt ofthe right to sue letters. 63. As a result of the sex discrimination, plaintiffs suffered financial, emotional, and other injuries, resulting in many cases in constructive discharge. The willful nature of the violations, committed with malice or reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of plaintiffs, warrant punitive damages against Combined pursuant to 42 U.S. C. § 1981a(b)(l). WHEREFORE, plaintiffs and the class respectfully request the following relief:
18

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 19 of 25 PageID #:19

a. a finding that this claim should proceed as a class claim on behalf of the class

described above, and authorizing appropriate notice to the class;

b. an order finding and declaring that Combined discriminated against plaintiffs and

the plaintiff class in violation of42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(l) and (2);

c. an order enjoining Combined from its.pattern or practice of discrimination,

including an order of reinstatement or other relieffor women who left Combined

because of the harassment;

d. a comprehensive injunction against continuing violations, including specific

procedures to assure effective internal complaint procedures and responses and

placing plaintiffs and the plaintiff class in their rightful places in the company;

e. damages in an amount to be determined by jury, including pre- and post-judgment

interest, and punitive damages;

f.

costs and attorneys fees, including expert witness fees; and

g. such other relief as is just and proper.

COUNT II CLAIM OF TRACI RADMANOVICH UNDER TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2fa) AND 2000e-3(a)

63. Count II incorporates by reference the above allegations.

64. As alleged above, Combined retaliated against plaintiff in violation of Title VII,

42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a).

65. As a result of Combined's actions plaintiff suffered financial, emotional, and

other injuries.

19

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 20 of 25 PageID #:20
66. The willful nature of these violations, committed with malice or reckless indifference to plaintiffs federally protected rights, warrants punitive damages against Combined pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§ 198la(b)(l).
WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests the following relief: a. damages in an amount to be determined by jury, including pre- and postjudgment interest, and punitive damages; b. costs and attorneys fees, including expert witness fees; and c. such other relief as is just and proper. COUNT III CLAIM OF BONNIE SHAFFER UNDER TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a) AND 2000e-3(a)
67. · Count III incorporates by reference the above allegations. 64. As alleged above, Combined retaliated against plaintiff in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a). 65. As a result of Combined's actions plaintiff suffered financial, emotional, and other injuries. 66. The willful nature of these violations, committed with malice or reckless indifference to plaintiffs federally protected rights, warrants punitive damages against Combined pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§ 198la(b)(l). WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests the following relief:
a. damages in an amount to be determined by jury, including pre- and postjudgment interest, and punitive damages;
b. costs and attorneys fees, including expert witness fees; and c. such other relief as is just and proper.
20

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 21 of 25 PageID #:21
COUNT IV CLAIM OF BRENDA PALMER UNDER TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a) AND 2000e-3(a) 71. Count IV incorporates by reference the above allegations. 64. As alleged above, Combined retaliated against plaintiff in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a). 65. As a result of Combined's actions plaintiff suffered financial, emotional, and other injuries. 66. The willful nature of these violations, committed with malice or reckless indifference to plaintiffs federally protected rights, warrants punitive damages against Combined pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§ 198la(b)(l). WHEREFORE, plaintiffrequests the following relief: a. damages in an amount to be determined by jury, including pre- and postjudgment interest, and punitive damages; b. costs and attorneys fees, including expert witness fees; and c. such other relief as is just and proper.
COUNTY CLAIM OF ELKE BUDREAU UNDER TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a) AND 2000e-3(a) 75. Count V incorporates by reference the above allegations. 64. As alleged above, Combined retaliated against plaintiff in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3(a). 65. As a result of Combined's actions plaintiff suffered financial, emotional, and other injuries.
21

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 22 of 25 PageID #:22
66. The willful nature of these violations, committed with malice or reckless indifference to plaintiffs federally protected rights, warrants punitive damages against Combined pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§ 198la(b)(l).
WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests the following relief: a. damages in an amount to be determined by jury, including pre- and postjudgment interest, and punitive damages; b. costs and attorneys fees, including expert witness fees; and c. such other relief as is just and proper. COUNT VI CLAIM OF PATRICIA SCHAMS UNDER TITLE VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-2(a) AND 2000e-3(a)
79. Count VI incorporates by reference the above allegations. 64. As alleged above, Combined retaliated against plaintiff in violation of Title VII, 42 U.S. C. § 2000e-3(a). 65. As a result of Combined's actions plaintiff suffered financial, emotional, and other injuries. 66. The willful naiure of these violations, committed wiih malice or reckless indifference to plaintiffs federally protected rights, warrants punitive damages against Combined pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§ 198la(b)(l). WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests the following relief:
a. damages in an amount to be determined by jury, including pre- and postjudgment interest, and punitive damages;
22

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 23 of 25 PageID #:23
b. costs and attorneys fees, including expert witness fees; and c. such other relief as is just and proper. A TRIAL BY JURY IS DEMANDED FOR ALL COUNTS.
Respectfully submitted,
One of the attorneys for plaintiffs Thomas R. Meites Joan H. Burger Josie Raimond Meites, Mulder, Burger & Mollica 208 South LaSalle Street, Suite 141 0 Chicago, Illinois 60604 312/263-0272 Patricia C. Benassi Benassi & Benassi, P.C. 300 N.E. Perry Avenue Peoria, IL 61603 309/674-3556
23

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 24 of 25 PageID #:24

Civil Cover Sheet

v

v

Page 1 of2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLlNOIS

Civil Cover Sheet

. U.v' ..·.I,I,,,::':.'n·~'.·' "- '

ISiiitbS This automated JS-44 conforms generally to the manual JS-44 approved by the Judicial Conference of the unite\!

in

September 1974. The data is required for the use of the Clerk or Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. The

.ir.formation contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filing and service ofpleadings or other papers as required

by law. This form is authorized for use only in the Northern District of Illinois.

Plaintiff(s): Radmanovich et al.

County of Residence:

Plaintiffs Atty:

Thomas R. Meites Meites, Mulder, Burger & Mollica 208 S. LaSalle St., #1410 (312) 263-0272

Defendant(s):Combined Insurance Company of America
0 1c 9 5 o 2 County ofResidence: Cook
Defendant's Atty:
JUDGE BUCKI.O
MAGISTRATE JUDGE KEYs

II. Basis of Jurisdiction:

3. Federal Question (U.S. not a party)

III. Citizenship of Principle Parties (Diversity Cases Only)
Plaintiff:- N/A Defendant:- N/A

DOCKETED
DEC 1 3 2001

IV. Origin:

1. Original Proceeding

/

V. Nature of Suit:

442 Employment

VI.Cause of Action:

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e et at.

VII. Requested in Complaint Class Action: Yes
Dollar Demand: Jury Demand: Yes

VIII. This case IS NOT a refiling of a previously dismissed case.

Signature:~ d · ~ ~
Date: ~ (3 1 '2-<90 l
If any of this information is incorrect, please go back to the Civil Cover Sheet Input form using the Back button in your browser and change it.
Once correct, print this form, sign and date it and submit it with your new civil action. Note: You may need to adjust the font size

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/13/01 Page 25 of 25 PageID #:25

In the Matter of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT CODRT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
Eastern Division

FIL

.

;:Ll-nJ·
,_ ' ·- ~

",,t

0 ·. :'; ~':r

Radmanovich et af ··
v.
Combined Insurance Company of America

,_,i_ :_;\J \

lU. iliS !\!(;T CQUiU

Case Number:

· ·

OlC 9502

APPEARANCES ARE HEREBY FILED BY THE UNDERSIGNED AS ATTORNEY(S) FOR:

Plaintiffs

'· .,, ;-,,,;, ,; , "J.'-~

'

c-~:.oedm

~A w
SIGNATU~pf" /~~

NAME
Thomas R. Meites
FIRM
Meites Mulder, Burger & Mollica
STREET ADDRESS
208 S. LaSalle St. #1410
CITr{~TATEIZJP
C tcago, IL 60604
(3'mN:g3~o2n

IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (SEE ITEM 4 ON REVERSE)
01880241

MEMBER OF TRIAL BAR?

0 YES

TRIAL ATTORNEY?

0 YES

NO D
NO D

SIGNATURE

(C)

NAME

FIRM

..

STREET ADDRESS

CITY/STATE/ZIP

TELEPHONE NUMBER

IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (SEE ITEM 4 ON REVERSE)

. MEMBER OF TRIAL BAR?
TRIAL ATTORNEY?
DESIGNATED AS LOCAL COUNSEL?

0 YES
D YES D YES

NO D
NO 0
NO D

_..._ (B)
s~.A c-+.11'"""'
NAME
Johanna J. Raimond
FIRM
same as (A)
STREET ADDRESS

DEr: 1 .,

01 -

~-

y

CITY/STATE/ZIP

TELEPHONE NUMBER

IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (SEE ITEM 4 ON REVERSE)
6230092
MEMBER OF TRIAL BAR?
TRIAL ATTORNEY?
DESIGNATED AS LOCAL COUNSEL?

0 YES
D YES
D YES

SIGNATURE

(D)

NO D
NO 0
NO D

NAME

FIRM STREET ADDRESS

CITY/STATE/ZIP

TELEPHONE NUMBER

IDENTIFICATION NUMBER (SEE ITEM 4 ON REVERSE)

MEMBER OF TRIAL BAR? TRIAL ATTORNEY? DESIGNATED AS LOCAL COUNSEL?

D YES D YES D YES

NO D NO D NO D

 
 Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 65 Filed: 09/04/03 Page 1 of 6 PageID #:518

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Brenda Palmer

Plaintiff,

v. Combined Insurance Company of America,
Defendant.

)

)

)

No. 02 C 1764

)

Judge James B. Zage1

p
c-;-.. --.-:';"

)

o.~
lJ..I

)

if.

~ 'J

.'

NOTICE OF MOTION

To: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on Tuesday, September 9, 2003, at 10:15 a.m., or as soon thereafter as I may be heard, I shall appear before the Honorable Judge James B. Zagel at the United States District Courthouse, 219 S. Dearborn Avenue, Chicago, Illinois in the courtroom usually occupied by him, and then and there present the attached PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR STATUS REGARDING REASSIGNMENT.

Respectfully submitted,
(

Thomas R. Meites Joan H. Burger Josie Raimond Meites, Mulder, Burger & Mollica 208 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1410 Chicago, Illinois 60604 (312) 263-0272

Patricia C. Benassi Benassi & Benassi, P.C. 300 N.E. Perry Avenue Peoria, IL 61603 (309) 674-3556

Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 65 Filed: 09/04/03 Page 2 of 6 PageID #:519
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On September 4, 2003, undersigned Counsel served the attached Notice of Motion on:
John P. Lynch (via hand delivery) Mark Steven Mester Patrick E. Gibbs Matthew Rawlinson Latham & Watkins 233 South Wacker Drive 5800 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606
Douglas Robert Stevens (regular mail) Robert Bruce Slocum Aon Corporation 200 East Randolph Street 8th Floor Chicago, lL 60601
t/~~'
Paul W. Mollica

Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 65 Filed: 09/04/03 Page 3 of 6 PageID #:520

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

(J

Brenda Palmer

Plaintiff,

v. Combined Insurance Company of America,
Defendant.

)

UJ

)

)

No. 02 C 1764

)

Judge James B. Zagel

)

n .. ".
U .!
CfJ

)

PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR STATUS REGARDING REASSIGNMENT Plaintiffs, by counsel, move for a status regarding the assignment of Radmanovich v. Combined Ins. Co., No. 02C9502 to this Court, which defendant now opposes, and state as follows: \. On July 29, 2003 , plaintiffs moved for the reassignment of Radmanovich from the docket of the late Judge James Alesia to this Court. No opposition was filed and the motion was granted on July 31, 2003 according to PACER. By coincidence and unknown to plaintiff, on July 29, 2003, the Executive Committee ordered assignment the same case to Judge John W. Darrah. 2. At a hearing on August 12,2003, the Court explained that the motion was granted "because Judge Darrah and I have consented to the transfer of the case to me." (Tr. at 2, Ex \.) Again, at that time defense counsel raised no objections to this order. Also at that time, the Court stayed the running of the statute oflimitations in Radmanovich until notice issues could be resolved. 3. On August 29,2003, this Court entered an order certifying a class action in Palmer. Both paliies are working on and exchanging drafts ofjoint notice in both Radmanovich and Palmer. 4. On September 3, 2003, Judge Darrah held a status in Radmanovich. (Plaintiff's counsel, relying on this Court's reassignment order and August 12, 2003 hearing, was not in attendance.) Although we do not yet have a transcript (it has been ordered), defendant informs us that Judge Darrah wants "the parties to meet and confer about the matter and then to contact the Chief Judge to determine whether Judge Zagel's granting of the motion to reassign Radmanovich

Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 65 Filed: 09/04/03 Page 4 of 6 PageID #:521
as a related case trumps the Executive Committee's assignment ofRadmanovich to Judge Darrah." (Ex. 2.)
5. In further correspondence, defendant now apparently opposes reassignment. (Ex. 3.) 6. Because this Court has already entered orders in Radmanovich in the wake of the reassignment, and the parties have been working on the assumption that this Court would authorize joint notice in both cases, the issue of case assignment has real and immediate consequences for the class. We ask this Court for a status to attempt to resolve the matter if possible, as opposed to extended motion practice between the Chief Judge, Judge Darrah and this Court.

Thomas R. Meites Joan H. Burger Josie Raimond Meites, Mulder, Burger & Mollica 208 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1410 Chicago, IlIinois 60604 (312) 263-0272

the attorneys for plaintiffs
Patricia C. Benassi Benassi & Benassi, P.C. 300 N.E. Perry Avenue Peoria, IL 61603 (309) 674-3556

-2-

Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 65 Filed: 09/04/03 Page 5 of 6 PageID #:522

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On September 4, 2003, undersigned Counsel served the attached on MOTION FOR STATUS REGARDING REASSIGNMENT:
John P. Lynch (via hand delivery) Mark Steven Mester Patrick E. Gibbs Matthew Rawlinson Latham & Watkins 233 South Wacker Drive 5800 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606
Douglas Robert Stevens (regular mail) Robert Bruce Slocum Aon Corporation 200 East Randolph Street 8th Floor Chicago, IL 6060 I

PLAINTIFFS'

-3-

Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 65 Filed: 09/04/03 Page 6 of 6 PageID #:523

. ~.~ ~'-'

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

<",

". -"'~',

-.-',1

·,:~XHIBITS

,:,'.':".,

. . . '-

--.,~. ' , ' , ' '-

'.

. ....

,.,."".,.,."._". _. '~~~?-"""'.'·':""'·':·-'-'·~-"'-·~" .. l·.... i-k "'"" ..~.,;>.~;;." ,.".,,- ','

-'-'-";~':.:.,,~"_:_ ..:c.::~.~c":.::>~e.-,';""",...:....

 
 Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 80 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:568
Minu1e Ord~r Foml (06197)

"\

, ' United States District Court' Northern District of Illinois

Name of Assigned Judge or Magistrate Judge
CASE NUMBER

James B. Zagel
02 c 1764

Sitting Judge if Other than Assigned Judge
DATE

1112/2005

CASE TITLE
MOTION:

PALMER vs. COMBINED INSURANCE CO.
[In the fol\owmg box (a) mdieate the party filmg the mot10n, e.g., plamttff, defendant, 3rd partyp\amt1ff, and (b) state bnefly the nature of the motion being presented.]

(original in 01 C 9502)

DOCKET ENTRY:

(I)

0

Filed motion of [use listing in "Motion" box above.]

(2)

0

Brief in support of motion due ___.

(3)

0

Answer brief to motion due___ Reply to answer brief due___.

( 4)

0

Ruling/Hearing on ___ set for ___ at ___.

(5)

0

Status hearing[held/continued to] [set for/re-set for] on ___ set for ___ at ___.

(6) 0

Pretrial conference[heldlcontinued to] [set for/re-set for] on ___ set for ___ at ___.

(7)

0

Trial[set for/re-set for] on ___ at ___.

(8)

0

[Bench/Jury trial] [Hearing] held/continued to ___ at ___.

(9)

0

• (10)

This case is dismissed [witblwithout] prejudice and without costs[by/agreement/pursuant to] 0 FRCP4(m) 0 Local Rule 41.1 0 FRCP4l(a)(l) 0 FRCP4l(a)(2) .
[Other docket entry] Enter order approving settlement.

• (11)

[For further detail see order attached to the original minute order.]

-

No notices required, advised in open col.lrt.

No notices required.

'---

Notices mailed by judge's sta!T.
-
Notiticd counsel by telephone.

7 -

Docketing to mail notices.

Mail AO 450 form.

-

Copy to judge/magistrate judge.

courtroom

DW

deputy's

initials

DatC/tim~ r~c.~ived in cenlral Clerk's Office

numbQr of notices
-l· '-". ,..__,~.,.y!Ucv;
dale doeketcd
doc~__O_A/1 · 1tia!s
date mailed notice
mailing deputy initials

·D,9cu.~~~.t
.Number .

Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 80 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:569
'

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

DOCKETED

Brenda Palmer, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Combined Insurance Company of America,
Defendant.

)

JAN 1 4 ZOOS

)

)

._./

)

o. 02-C-1764

)

)

Judge James B. Zagel

) )

,fAil! I -~ 2005

)

)

Traci Radmanovich, on behalf ofherself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
V.
Combined Insurance Company of America, Defendant.

)

)

)

)

No. 01-C-9502

)

)

Judge James B. Zagel

)

)

)

)

ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT

WHEREAS, two lawsuits are pending before this Court entitled Radmanovich v.

Combined Insurance Company ofAmerica, No. 02-C-1764, and Palmer v. Combined Insurance

Company ofAmerica, No. 01-C-9502 (the "Litigation");

WHEREAS, this Court on August 10, 2004 preliminarily approved the final settlement

of the Litigation reached between Traci Radmanovich and Brenda Palmer, individually and on

behalf of all class members as defined by the Stipulation of Settlement and Consent Decree ("the

Stipulation"), and Combined Insurance Company of America in accordance with the Stipulation;

Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 80 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:570
WHEREAS, the Court having been informed that actual notice was sent via first class mail to approximately 7,296 class members; and
WHEREAS, the Court on October 22, 2004 held a fairness hearing to which members of the settlement class, including any objectors to the settlement, were invited:
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: I. This Order hereby incorporates by reference the definitions in the Stipulation and all terms used herein shall have the same meanings as set forth in the Stipulation. 2. The Court finds that Notice to the class required by Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure has been given in an adequate and sufficient manner, constituting the best notice practicable, complying in all respects with such Rules and due process, including but not limited to the forms of notice and the methods of identifying and giving notice to the class. 3. The Court finds that the Stipulation is the product of substantial, good faith, arm's length negotiations between the Parties and, considering the contributions made, releases given and other terms, is in all respects fair, just, adequate, reasonable and proper, and in the best interests in the class. 4. The Court approves the settlement in its entirety. 5. Pursuant to Paragraph 96 of the Stipulation, the Court hereby appoints Susan Getzendanner and Carol Posegate as monitors to oversee Combined Insurance Company of America's implementation of the terms of Articles IX and X of the Stipulation. 6. The parties shall comply with all the terms of this Order and the Stipulation, and shall undertake all acts and perform all obligations imposed under this Order and the Stipulation as reasonably necessary to effectuate all qfl!J.~<ir ~~ffiW·
2

Case: 1:02-cv-01764 Document #: 80 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:571
7. The class members shall, as of the date of the payment of the settlement fund, conclusively be deemed to have released and discharged claims in accordance with Paragraph 55 of the Stipulation.
8. The Court awards to Class Counsel costs oflitigation in the amount of $714,382 and attorneys' fees in the amount of$1,280,000. The Court finds the work performed by Class Counsel in prosecuting the claims and their settlement efforts have been on behalf of and in the interests of the overall Class (including the class representatives) and have benefitted the class as a whole, and have not been on behalf of or in the interests of the individual claimants.
9. The Court directs the entry of judgment of dismissal with prejudice of this litigation.
I0. The Court, without in any way affecting the finality of this Order, retains jurisdiction for the purposes of, among other things, all matters relating to administration and consummation of the Settlement, including without limitation effectuating the Stipulation, ordering the distribution of funds to class members and resolving any disputes arising from or relating to the foregoing.
Entered this ~day of January, 20
3

 
 Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 1 of 45 PageID #:563

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

JAN 1 2 2005

EASTERN DIVISION

J ' .. '. ::S B. ZAGEU

TRACI RADMANOVICH, on behalf of )

,-.---~-_f\1CJ, _COU_RT

herself and others similarly situated,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

v.

)

)

Judge James B. Zagel

COMBINED INSURANCE COMPANY )

OFAMERICA,

)

)

Defendant. )

BRENDA PALMER, on behalf of herself )

and others similarly situated,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

v.

)

J

)

COMBINED INSURANCE COMPANY )

OFAMERICA,

)

)

Defendant. )

Case No. 02-C-1764 / Judge James B. Zagel

CORRECTED STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT AND CONSENT DECREE

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 2 of 45 PageID #:564

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.

PURPOSES OF THE CONSENT DECREE ....................................................................... !

II. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... I

A. The Radmanovich Action ........................................................................................ I

B. Nine Additional Lawsuits Are Filed By Plaintiffs' Counsel ................................... 3

C. Procedural Developments In The Ten Cases .......................................................... .4

D. The Hamilton Action ............................................................................................... 6

E. The January 2004 Mediation ...................................................................................6

III. DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................................................... 8

IV. JURISDICTION ................................................................................................................ ! 0

V. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION OF CONSENT DECREE ................................. IO

VI. NO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY .................................................................................... II

VII. SCOPE AND EFFECT OF SETTLEMENT .................................................................... 12

A. Definition Of Settlement Class .............................................................................. 12

B. Settlement Scope .................................................................................................... 12

C. Mutual Release Of Claims ..................................................................................... 13

VIII. DISMISSAL OF ACT!ONS .............................................................................................. 15

IX. GENERAL INJUNCTIVE PROVISIONS ........................................................................ 16

A. Harassment And Discrimination............................................................................16

B. Retaliation .............................................................................................................. 16

X. SPECIFIC INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PROVISIONS ............................................................ 17

A. Anti-Harassment And Anti-Discrimination Policy................................................ 17

B. Consultant .............................................................................................................. 18

C. Sexual Harassment I Discrimination Training ....................................................... 19

D. Complaint Procedures ............................................................................................21

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 3 of 45 PageID #:565
E. Policies Designed To Promote Supervisor Accountability....................................24 F. Promotions .............................................................................................................26 G. Compensation ........................................................................................................28 H. The Monitors ..........................................................................................................28 XI. ENFORCEMENT OF THE CONSENT DECREE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES .......................................................................................32 A. Enforcement Of The Consent Decree ....................................................................32 B. Dispute Resolution ................................................................................................ .32 XII. MONETARY RELIEF, NOTICE AND CLAIMS PROCEDURE ...................................33 A. The Settlement Amount .........................................................................................33 B. Eligibility Requirements ........................................................................................34 C. Procedures To Determine Eligibility And Award Amounts ..................................34 XIII. CONFIDENTIALITY OF AWARDS/STATEMENTS TO THE PRESS ........................36 XIV. NOTICE TO THE CLASS, OBJECTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS ...................................37 A. Notice .................................................................................................................... .37 B. Objections And Exclusions ....................................................................................38 XV. CONFIDENTIALITY OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO CLASS COUNSEL UNDER THE TERMS OF THIS CONSENT DECREE.................................................. .39 XVI. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ..................................................................................40 A. Calculation Of Time ............................................................................................. .40 B. Counterparts ...........................................................................................................40 C. Persons Bound By Consent Decree ...................................................................... .40 D. Construction ...........................................................................................................40 E. Integration ..............................................................................................................40 XVII. MODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY OF THE CONSENT DECREE .................. ..40 XVIII. NOTICES ...........................................................................................................................41
ii

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 4 of 45 PageID #:566
I. Combined Insurance Company of America ("Combined") and the other parties to the above-captioned actions enter into the following Stipulation of Settlement and Consent Decree ("Consent Decree").
I. PURPOSES OF THE CONSENT DECREE 2. The parties have entered into this Consent Decree for the following purposes:
a. To maintain equal employment opportunities for all of Combined's agents, supervisors and managers;
b. To promote compliance with Combined's antidiscrimination and anti-harassment policies;
c. To enhance existing procedures for providing appropriate relief to members of the Settlement Class, as that term is defined below.
d. To prevent retaliation against any person who might oppose any illegal employment practices and to promote compliance with Combined's policies against such retaliation; and
e. To avoid further expensive and protracted litigation and to provide finality of claims and decisions.
II. INTRODUCTION The factual background and procedural history of these cases are set forth below:
A. The Radmanovich Action 3. On December 13, 200 I, one current and nine former female agents and supervisors of Combined filed a Complaint against Combined, alleging that Combined was responsible for job-related sex discrimination and harassment under Title VII of the Civil Rights

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 5 of 45 PageID #:567
Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq. ("Title VII"). 1 See Radmanovich, et al. v. Combined, No. 01-C-9502.
4. In their Complaint, Plaintiffs sought to represent a class consisting of current and former female sales trainees, sales agents, supervisors and/or managers in Combined's Seventh Essential Sales Force. The Complaint in Radmanovich alleged that Plaintiffs and a proposed class of similarly-situated women had been discriminated against by Combined in, inter alia, promotions, training, compensation, hours, transfers and job assignments. The Complaint further alleged a pattern or practice of gender-based harassment at Combined as well as a hostile work environment. Plaintiffs sought classwide compensatory and punitive damages. The Radmanovich action was assigned to Judge James H. Alesia.
5. On February 5, 2002, Judge Alesia concluded that joinder of the Plaintiffs was improper under Fed. R. Civ. P. 20 and dismissed Plaintiffs' Complaint without prejudice.
6. On February 26, 2002, counsel for Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint, which identified Ms. Radmanovich as the sole class representative. The Amended Complaint continued to allege that Ms. Radmanovich and a proposed class of similarly-situated women had been discriminated against by Combined in promotions, training, compensation, hours, transfers and job assignments and that they had likewise been subjected to harassment and a hostile work environment. Ms. Radmanovich sought class-wide compensatory and punitive damages on behalf of"all women who, at any time on or after April30, 1999, worked in the Seventh
The Plaintiffs who filed the Radmanovich action were Traci Radmanovich ("Ms. Radmanovich"), Cathy Aloffo ("Ms. Aloffo"), Terry Boebel ("Ms. Boebel"), Elke Budreau ("Ms. Budreau"), Maria Eason ("Ms. Eason"), Martha Mausshardt ("Ms. Mausshardt"), Vicky Miller ("Ms. Miller"), Patricia Schams ("Ms. Schams"), Bonnie Shaffer ("Ms. Shaffer") and Brenda Palmer ("Ms. Palmer").
2

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 6 of 45 PageID #:568
Essential Sales Force of Combined and were sales agents or managers at some point during their employment with Combined."
B. Nine Additional Lawsuits Are Filed By Plaintiffs' Counsel 7. In addition to there-filing ofRadmanovich, Plaintiffs' counsel filed on
March 8, 2002 nine additional cases on behalf of the other Plaintiffs who were originally named in the Radmanovich action. These cases were captioned: Cathy Aloffo v. Combined, No. 02-C1768 (Leinenweber, J.); Terry L. Boebel v. Combined, No. 02-C-1772 (Coar, J.); Elke M. Budreau v. Combined, No. 02-C-1769 (Marovich, J.); Maria Eason v. Combined, No. 02-C-1770 (Gottschall, J.); Martha Mausshardt v. Combined, No. 02-C-1766 (Gottschall, J.); Vicky A. Miller v. Combined, No. 02-C-1773 (Leinenweber, J.); Patricia Schams v. Combined, No. 02-C1771 (Lindberg, J.,); Bonnie Shaffer v. Combined, No. 02-C-1774 (Darrah, J.); and Brenda Palmer v. Combined, No. 02-C-1764 (Zagel, J.).
8. Eight of these nine additional suits were brought as individual actions, while one of them -- the Palmer action-- was filed as another putative class action. The Plaintiff in Palmer, Ms. Palmer, sought to represent a class consisting of all women who worked in the Seventh Essential Sales Force of Combined at any time on or after March 8, 2002 and were sales agents or managers at some point during their employment with Combined. Like Ms. Radmanovich, Ms. Palmer alleged that she and a proposed class of similarly-situated women had been discriminated against by Combined in promotions, training, compensation, hours, transfers and job assignments and that she and the proposed class had likewise been subjected to harassment and a hostile work environment. Ms. Palmer sought classwide injunctive relief and punitive damages, as well as compensatory damages on behalf of herself only. The Palmer action was assigned to Judge James B. Zagel.
3

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 7 of 45 PageID #:569
C. Procedural Developments In The Ten Cases 9. Combined filed its answer in Radmanovich on March 12,2002 and filed its answers in the remaining nine cases on April 26, 2002. In these answers, Combined denied that Plaintiffs and the proposed classes in Radmanovich and Palmer had suffered any discrimination or harassment while at Combined. Combined also set forth a number of other defenses to the claims being made by Plaintiffs in each of the actions. Those defenses are set forth in full in the pleadings filed by Combined. I0. Throughout the spring and summer of2002, the parties engaged in extensive document and data discovery, with Combined producing to Plaintiffs thousands of documents and numerous data compilations. I I. In August 2002, the parties agreed to stay all ten of these cases so that they could enter into mediation. The parties continued to exchange relevant documents and data in preparation for the mediation. The mediation itself was held in December 2002, with Linda Singer of ADR Associates, L.L.C. serving as the mediator. The mediation, however, was unsuccessful, and active litigation resumed in January 2003. 12. On May 1, 2003, Ms. Radmanovich filed a motion to certify a class of all women who worked in the Seventh Essential Sales Force of Combined at any time on or after April 30, 1999 and were sales agents or managers at some point during their employment with Combined. Ms. Radmanovich sought certification of the proposed class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). 13. On May 20,2003, Ms. Palmer filed a motion to certify a class of all women who worked in the Seventh Essential Sales Force of Combined at any time on or after April 30, 1999 and were sales agents or managers at some point during their employment with
4

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 8 of 45 PageID #:570
Combined. Ms. Palmer sought certification of the proposed class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) and 23(b)(3).
14. On June 26, 2003, Judge Alesia denied Ms. Radmanovich's motion for class certification. Although Judge Alesia found that Ms. Radmanovich had satisfied the requirements of subsection (a) of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, he concluded that she failed to meet the requirements of subsection (b)(3) of that rule, and he concluded that the proposed class would be "totally unmanageable."
15. On August 13, 2003, Judge Lindberg granted Combined's motion for summary judgment in the Schams matter. Ms. Schams filed a notice of appeal on September II, 2003.
16. On September I, 2003, Judge Zagel granted Ms. Palmer's motion for class certification. In so ruling, Judge Zagel found that Ms. Palmer satisfied the requirements of subsections (a) and (b)(2) of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. Judge Zagel further found (in the alternative) that Ms. Palmer satisfied the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3).
17. On September 16, 2003, Combined moved for reconsideration of Judge Zagel's ruling granting class certification in Palmer.
18. On November 17, 2003, Judge Darrah granted Combined's motion for summary judgment in the Shaffer case. Ms. Shaffer filed a notice of appeal on November 25, 2003.
19. On January 16,2004, Judge Coar granted Combined's motion for summary judgment in the Boebel matter. Ms. Boebel filed a notice of appeal on February II, 2004.
5

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 9 of 45 PageID #:571
D. The Hamilton Action 20. On July 1, 2003 and shortly after Judge Alesia had denied class certification in Radmanovich, Plaintiffs' counsel filed a complaint styled Hamilton, et al. v. Combined, No. 03 C 4587. Hamilton was filed on behalf of 118 current and former female employees of Combined (the "Hamilton Claimants"), and these women asserted the same types of Title VII claims alleged in Radmanovich and the nine other cases discussed above. The individuals who filed Hamilton were members of the proposed class in Radmanovich. The Hamilton Claimants sought both compensatory and punitive damages. The Hamilton case was assigned to Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan. 21. On February 5, 2004, Judge Der-Yeghiayan dismissed the Hamilton matter pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41 (b). The Hamilton Claimants filed a notice of appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on March 3, 2004.
E. The January 2004 Mediation 22. In November, 2003, the parties again agreed to mediation in an effort to settle all of the pending cases. That mediation was held on January 19 and January 20, 2004 before David Rotman of the mediation firm Gregorio, Haldeman and Piazza. Although the parties did not reach a settlement at the end of the two-day mediation, the parties continued to negotiate, with the able assistance of Mr. Rotman. 23. On March 3, 2004, the mediator submitted to each side a "mediator's proposal," which proposal was further clarified by the mediator on March 8, 2004. The mediator proposed that all ofthe foregoing cases be settled for a total payment by Combined of $8.5 million, which amount would include payments to the Named Plaintiffs, the Hamilton Claimants,
6

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 10 of 45 PageID #:572
the Settlement Class, Class Counsels' attorneys' fees, as well as the cost of notice and administration of the claims process under the settlement.
24. On March 12, 2004, the parties indicated that they would accept the mediator's proposal and that they would negotiate in good faith the injunctive relief and other terms of this Consent Decree.
25. Plaintiffs have vigorously prosecuted these cases, and Combined has vigorously defended them. While discovery has not yet been completed, Combined has produced to Class Counsel thousands of documents and millions of bytes of computer data relevant to both the class certification issue as well as Combined's defenses and the merits of the claims of Plaintiffs, the Hamilton Claimants and the members of the two proposed classes.
26. The parties have engaged in extensive mediation and settlement negotiations since December 2002. As part of the negotiation process, Combined has provided Class Counsel with personnel and other employment-related information relating to Plaintiffs, the Hamilton Claimants and the members of the proposed classes in Radmanovich and Palmer. Combined has also produced statistical analyses as well as other relevant information during these negotiations. As a result of these negotiations, the parties have reached an agreement that is contained in this Consent Decree.
27. The parties agree that the formal and informal discovery conducted in these actions, the depositions taken by both sides, the documents and data produced and the information exchanged during settlement negotiations and mediation are sufficient to assess the merits of the respective parties' positions, claims and defenses and to compromise the issues on a fair and equitable basis. This Consent Decree shall constitute a resolution of all claims that were asserted or could have been asserted in Radmanovich v. Combined, Palmer v. Combined,
7

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 11 of 45 PageID #:573
Hamilton v. Combined, Aloffo v. Combined, Boebel v. Combined, Budreau v. Combined, Eason v. Combined, Mausshardt v. Combined, Miller v. Combined, Schams v. Combined and Shaffer v. Combined. As indicated by the signatures at the end of the document, the parties have consented to the entry of this Consent Decree.
III. DEFINITIONS 28. In addition to the terms defined elsewhere in the Consent Decree, the following terms when used herein shall have the following meanings: 29. "Best Efforts" means reasonable steps to realize or comply with the specified objectives to which the best efforts are directed. 30. "Class" or "Settlement Class" is defined below in Section VII. 31. "Class Counsel" or "Plaintiffs' Counsel" refers to Patricia Benassi and Athena M. Papachronis Herman ofBenassi & Benassi, P.C. and Thomas Meites, Joan Burger, Paul Mollica, Shona Glink and Josie Raimond of Meites, Mulder, Burger & Mollica. 32. "Class Period" or "Liability Period" means the period between April 30, 1999 and the Preliminary Approval Date for purposes of monetary relief and from April 30, 1999 to the final termination of this Consent Decree for purposes of injunctive and declaratory relief. 33. "Class Member" means any member of the Settlement Class, as that term is defined herein. 34. "Court" means the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. 35. "Defendant" or "Company" or "Combined" means Combined Insurance Company of America (including Combined Life Insurance Company of New York) and any predecessors or successors in interest, and the term "Seventh Essential Sales Force" shall refer to
8

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 12 of 45 PageID #:574
the sales force in which Named Plaintiffs work or have worked and is understood to mean that sales force in the United States and Puerto Rico only.
36. "EEO Mailing" is a notice sent by Combined once every four months to all sales agents, sales managers, district managers and executive level employees of the Seventh Essential Workforce containing the EEO and promotion policies described in Section X of this Consent Decree ("Specific Injunctive Relief Provisions"). These materials will not be physically attached to any other document, but they may be included in the same mailing as other materials.
37. "Effective Date" shall refer to the date upon which final approval of the Consent Decree is granted by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
38. "Monitors" means the persons who have been jointly appointed to monitor this Consent Decree pursuant to Section X and their successors, if any.
39. "Named Plaintiffs" refers to Traci Radmanovich, Brenda Palmer, Cathy Aloffo, Terry Boebel, Elke Budreau, Maria Eason, Martha Mausshardt, Vicky Miller, Patricia Schams, and Bonnie Shaffer.
40. "Parties" means Combined and the Plaintiffs. 41. "Plaintiffs" refers to the Named Plaintiffs and the Hamilton Claimants. 42. "Preliminary Approval Date" means the date upon which Preliminary Approval of the Parties' Consent Decree was granted by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. 43. Terms defined herein shall have the meaning set forth above and throughout this Consent Decree whether the term is capitalized or not.
9

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 13 of 45 PageID #:575
IV. JURJSDICTION 44. The Court has jurisdiction over the Parties and the subject matter of these actions. The pleadings filed in Radmanovich, Palmer, Hamilton and the other pending cases contain claims that, if proven, would authorize the Court to grant the monetary and equitable relief set forth in this Consent Decree. Venue is proper in this district. 45. This Court shall retain jurisdiction of these actions during the duration of the Consent Decree for the purpose of resolving all disputes, interpreting and enforcing this Consent Decree and otherwise entering all orders and agreements that may be necessary to implement the relief provided herein. V. EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION OF CONSENT DECREE 46. The injunctive provisions and agreements contained herein shall be effective immediately upon the Effective Date. 47. Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions of this Consent Decree and the agreements contained herein shall remain in effect for three years from the Effective Date. Unless further extensions are granted by the Court pursuant to the procedures set forth in Paragraph 48 below, the Consent Decree shall expire without further action of the Parties on the third anniversary of the Effective Date. 48. At any time prior to one hundred twenty (120) days before the third anniversary of the Effective Date, Class Counsel may petition the Court to extend the Consent Decree for one additional year, provided that Class Counsel can demonstrate to the Court that Combined has substantially failed to perform any of its material obligations under the Consent Decree. Combined may respond to any such application in accordance with the Local Rules of
10

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 14 of 45 PageID #:576
the Court. The Court may extend the Consent Decree for one year (or shorter) only ifthe conditions set forth above are established by Class Counsel by a preponderance of the evidence.
VI. NO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY 49. The Court has made no findings concerning Combined's alleged violations of Title VII or any other federal, state or local law, regulation, order or rule. The Court has likewise made no findings or determinations with respect to the presence or existence of any harassment or discrimination alleged by the Plaintiffs and/or the Settlement Class. Moreover, the Court has made no finding or determination that there was or is a pattern or practice of either harassment or discrimination at Combined. Accordingly, this Consent Decree shall not constitute and shall not be used in this or any other case or action as evidence of any such violation of Title VII or any other federal, state or local law, regulation, order or rule. If for any reason settlement of these matters is not effectuated, no evidence of this stipulation and proposed Consent Decree shall be admissible for any purpose in this or any other action. 50. By agreeing to and voluntarily entering into this Consent Decree, there is no admission or concession (express or implied) by the Plaintiffs or Combined that Combined has or has not in any way violated Title VII or any other federal, state or local law, regulation, order or rule. This Consent Decree does not contain and will not be interpreted or construed to contain any such admission. The Parties agree that they will not now or hereafter argue or contend that it can or should be treated as such. 51. Without limiting the foregoing in any way, nothing contained herein shall be construed as an admission by Combined that its agents or supervisors are not independent contractors within the meaning of Title VII or any other federal, state or local law. Moreover, Combined expressly reserves the right to take the position in any other proceeding that some or
11

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 15 of 45 PageID #:577
all of its agents or supervisors are independent contractors, and Combined likewise reserves the right to take whatever steps it deems appropriate to further confirm the status of some or all of its agents and/or supervisors as independent contractors. In the event, however, that Combined takes the position that some or all of its agents and/or supervisors are independent contractors or takes steps to confirm their status as such, the terms of the Consent Decree shall remain binding on Combined through the duration of this Consent Decree.
VII. SCOPE AND EFFECT OF SETTLEMENT A. Definition Of Settlement Class
52. For settlement purposes only, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2), the Court hereby certifies, for purposes of injunctive and declaratory relief, a class described as follows: All women who at any time between April 30, 1999 and the final termination of the Consent Decree, are working, have worked or will work in the Seventh Essential Sales Force of Combined and were sales trainees, sales agents, supervisors and/or managers at some point during their employment with Combined.
53. For settlement purposes only, the Parties stipulate, for purposes of monetary relief only, to the certification of a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) described as follows: All women who, at any time between April30, 1999 and August 3, 2004 worked in the Seventh Essential Sales Force of Combined and were sales trainees, sales agents, supervisors and/or managers at some point during their employment with Combined.
B. Settlement Scope 54. This Consent Decree is intended to and does effectuate a full, final and complete resolution of all allegations of gender-based discrimination, including but not limited to, harassment and/or retaliation occurring on or before the Preliminary Approval Date, that were
12

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 16 of 45 PageID #:578
or could have been brought by or on behalf of the Plaintiffs and/or one or more members of the classes they seek to represent, including but not limited to all claims arising under federal, state and/or local laws as well as any and all claims for attorneys fees and costs.
C. Mutual Release Of Claims 55. The negotiation and entry of this Consent Decree have been undertaken by the Parties for the purpose of settling all claims of harassment, hostile work environment and/or discrimination that Plaintiffs and the members of the Settlement Class have brought against Combined or could have brought in one or more of the lawsuits being settled through entry of this Consent Decree. On the Effective Date, the Plaintiffs and all members of the Settlement Class who did not opt-out, both individually and as a class, for themselves, their attorneys, spouses, executors, representatives, heirs, successors, attorneys and assigns and any other persons who could claim through them, in consideration for the monetary and injunctive relief set forth herein, the sufficiency of which consideration is expressly acknowledged, fully and finally release and forever discharge Combined, its present and former parents, affiliated or subsidiary companies and each of their respective present, former and future officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, representatives, consultants, attorneys, successors and assigns and their respective pension, profit-sharing, savings and other employee benefit plans of any nature and those plans' fiduciaries, representatives, trustees and administrators (the "Released Parties") from any and all past and/or present claims, rights, demands, administrative charges, complaints, actions, causes of action, obligations or liabilities of any and every kind for individual relief and/or class injunctive and monetary relief (including without limitation all forms of front pay, back pay, compensatory and/or punitive damages) based upon any and all claims of harassment and/or discrimination (whether known or unknown) that arose before the
13

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 17 of 45 PageID #:579
Preliminary Approval Date, including but not limited to any and all claims for hostile work environment, harassment or discrimination relating to job assignments, premium assignment, compensation, job training, discipline, promotions, training or any other terms, conditions, benefits or privileges of employment and further including without limitation any such claims that any member of the Settlement Class may have filed or caused to be filed in any complaint before any court oflaw or before any administrative agency (state, federal or local) or before any arbitrator or board prior to the Preliminary Approval Date.
56. Without limiting the foregoing in any way whatsoever, the Plaintiffs shall also generally release the Released Parties from any and all claims, rights, demands, charges, complaints, actions, causes of action, obligations or liabilities of any and every kind whether related to harassment or discrimination or not that arose prior to the Preliminary Approval Date (whether known or unknown).
57. This Consent Decree specifically releases any and all class and individual claims of harassment and/or discrimination underlying the allegations contained in Plaintiffs' EEOC charges and/or the initial complaints and amended pleadings in these actions for both monetary and injunctive relief. This Consent Decree also resolves all claims for attorneys' fees and expenses incurred and/or to be incurred in the claims process in Radmanovich v. Combined, Palmer v. Combined, Hamilton v. Combined, Aloffo v. Combined, Boebel v. Combined, Budreau v. Combined, Eason v. Combined, Mausshardt v. Combined, Miller v. Combined, Schams v. Combined and Shaffer v. Combined. Class Members who currently have claims pending in any administrative proceeding (federal, state or local), in any complaint before a court of law or before an arbitrator or board will receive the Special Notice attached to this agreement as Attachment 2. The Special Notice will inform such Class Members that they must file a
14

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 18 of 45 PageID #:580
timely "opt-out" statement as described in Paragraph 129 of the Consent Decree if they want to continue to pursue their independent claims against Combined. The Special Notice will explain that if such Class Member does not file a timely "opt-out" statement, any claims she currently has pending in any other proceeding will be extinguished by the terms of this Consent Decree. All such Class Members who do not submit a timely opt-out statement shall have the right to participate fully in the benefits ofthis Consent Decree including the right to submit a claim for a monetary award pursuant to Section XII ofthis Consent Decree. The Special Notice will be sent to each Class Member identified by Combined with a currently-pending claim and to her attorney of record (if any).
58. Combined, on behalf of itself, its representatives, heirs, successors, agents, attorneys and assigns and any other persons or entities who could claim through it, in consideration for the entering into the terms of this Consent Decree, the sufficiency of which consideration is expressly acknowledged, generally releases and forever discharges Plaintiffs from any and all claims, rights, demands, charges, complaints, actions, causes of action, obligations or liabilities of any and every kind that arose prior to the Preliminary Approval Date (whether known or unknown).
59. The releases contained herein shall survive the expiration of the Consent Decree.
VIII. DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS 60. The Parties agree that with the exception of Radmanovich and Palmer, all ofthe pending cases to which the Plaintiffs are parties should be dismissed as soon as practicable. To this end, the parties agree to execute a Joint Motion to Dismiss within fifteen
15

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 19 of 45 PageID #:581
(15) days after the Effective Date. Radmanovich and Palmer shall, in turn, be dismissed with prejudice upon the expiration of this Consent Decree.
IX. GENERAL INJUNCTIVE PROVISIONS A. Harassment And Discrimination
61. Combined and its officers, management and successors and assigns, or any of them, are enjoined and restrained from: (i) discriminating against women on the basis of sex or gender; (ii) engaging in or being a party to any action, policy or practice that is intended to or known to have the effect of sexually harassing or intimidating any female employee on the basis of her gender; (iii) creating, facilitating or knowingly tolerating the existence of a work environment that is sexually hostile to females; and (iv) taking any adverse action or retaliating against any person in the Seventh Essential Sales Force because the that person opposed, refused to implement or otherwise objected to any practice, policy or act of gender discrimination or harassment against workers at Combined.
B. Retaliation 62. Combined and its officers, agents, management, successors and assigns, or any ofthem, are hereby enjoined from engaging in, implementing or knowingly tolerating any action, policy or practice with the purpose of retaliating against any current or former worker in Combined's Seventh Essential Sales Force because he or she opposed any practice of gender discrimination, sexual harassment or gender-based harassment; filed a charge of discrimination alleging any such practice; testified or participated in any manner in any investigation (including, without limitation, any internal investigation undertaken by Combined), proceeding or hearing in connection with these cases and/or relating to any claim of gender discrimination, sexual harassment or gender-based harassment; was identified as a possible witness in these actions;
16

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 20 of 45 PageID #:582
asserted any rights under this Consent Decree; or sought and/or received any monetary and/or non-monetary relief in accordance with this Consent Decree. Moreover, Combined and its officers and management shall not take any adverse action or retaliate against any worker in the Seventh Essential Sales Force because the worker opposed, refused to implement or otherwise objected to any practice, policy or act of sexual harassment or gender-based discrimination by or at Combined. Without limiting the foregoing, it is not the intent of the parties to limit Combined's rights to transfer, discipline or discharge workers where that would otherwise be appropriate.
X. SPECIFIC INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PROVISIONS A. Anti-Harassment And Anti-Discrimination Policy 63. Combined reaffirms the following Statement Against Sexual Harassment and Gender-Based Discrimination: Combined Insurance Company of America is committed to maintaining a policy against discrimination and harassment, including: Harassment or discrimination based on sex, race, national origin, ethnicity, color, religion, age, disability or sexual orientation; Retaliation against persons who complain of such harassment or discrimination or who cooperate in the investigations of such complaints; and Combined is dedicated to responding promptly and appropriately to any acts of harassment, discrimination or retaliation; to maintaining a disciplinary system that is designed to deter future acts of harassment, discrimination or retaliation; and to maintaining a work environment for its workers that encourages tolerance, respect and dignity. This paragraph does not create any contractual causes of action or other rights that would not otherwise exist.
17

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 21 of 45 PageID #:583
B. Consultant 64. Combined will hire a consulting firm mutually-agreed upon by the Parties to assist it in reviewing and revising its Equal Employment Opportunity ("EEO'') policies, EEO complaint investigation procedures and training programs. The consulting firm must have experience in aiding corporations in formulating and implementing corporate EEO programs. 65. Within 120 days of the Effective Date or at a later date agreed to by the Parties, the consulting firm will review Combined's EEO policies (including but not limited to its problem-solving procedure, investigation procedures and the training program used by Combined's Human Resource Department to train agents, managers and other staff) and prepare a written report describing the efficacy of those policies and procedures. This report will be distributed to Combined, the Monitors and Class Counsel. In this written report, the consulting firm will make recommendations (if any) as to whether Combined's existing EEO policies and training programs should be maintained in their current form or revised. Class Counsel agree to maintain the confidentiality of the consultant's report. Combined will provide to Class Counsel and the Monitors a summary of the actions taken (if any) in response to the recommendations of the Consultant. 66. The recommendations of the consulting firm must be consistent with the terms ofthis Consent Decree, and Combined shall be under no obligation to implement policies or procedures that are inconsistent with this Consent Decree. 67. Combined agrees to give serious consideration to any recommendations made by tbe aforementioned consulting firm. If Combined elects to not implement any recommendation, it will explain in writing the basis for its decision. Such explanation will be distributed to Class Counsel and the Monitors. Witbout limiting the foregoing, this paragraph
18

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 22 of 45 PageID #:584
shall not be construed to impose obligations on Combined that are not specified in this Consent Decree or otherwise imposed by law.
68. In addition to the above, the consulting firm will assist Combined in providing the train-the-trainer instruction.
C. Sexual Harassment I Discrimination Training 69. Combined agrees that it will maintain a human resources training program for the Seventh Essential Sales Force. That training will include: (I) anti-harassment/Equal Employment Opportunity ("EEO") training (as described below in Paragraph 70) for all newlyhired sales agents at Combined's Sales School; (2) a refresher course for persons at the level of sales manager and above who have not received any training for a period of one (I) year; (3) training for all newly-promoted supervisors (at every level) as part of Junior Executive Training ("JET"); and (4) advanced training for management and executive positions (i.e., subregional managers and above). 70. At a minimum, the subjects to be covered by the training referenced in Paragraph 69 shall include: (i) federal and state equal employment opportunity laws, including but not limited to the general provisions of these laws and the basis on which discrimination is prohibited under these laws; (ii) the application of equal employment opportunity law to typical employment situations, including but not limited to promotion decisions, work assignments, training and other career advancement opportunities; (iii) review of Combined's internal complaint procedure; (iv) responding to complaints of harassment; (v) responding to complaints of discrimination in the distribution of opportunities, resources and services such as lead and referral cards, territorial assignments, management support; and (vi) supervisory follow-up on
19

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 23 of 45 PageID #:585
EEO complaints, including but not limited to prohibition against retaliation, working with the complainant and consideration of appropriate discipline for the offender.
71. All such training shall be conducted by Combined's Human Resources Department or by trainers or investigators who have completed train-the-trainer instruction. The Parties agree that Combined may use audio-visual materials (as appropriate) for purposes of the training described in Paragraph 70. Combined shall, however, use its best efforts to utilize live trainers for purposes of the training at Combined's Sales School and JET.
72. Combined agrees that it shall have a senior management official communicate Combined's commitment to its EEO policies at the beginning of all sexual harassment training. Audio-visual materials may be used for this component of training in all instances.
73. Newly-promoted district managers shall receive the training referenced in Paragraph 70 within six (6) months of the date of their promotion or initial hiring into the district
manager position. Any other person attaining a management or executive position in the < )
Seventh Essential Sales Force who did not receive the foregoing training upon being promot~o
the position of district manager shall receive such training within four (4) months of attaining a management or executive position in the Seventh Essential Sales Force.
74. In addition to any other training specified in this Consent Decree, Combined shall develop a diversity training program for all newly-promoted supervisors and managers in the Seventh Essential Sales Force to continue to promote the maintenance of a diverse work force. It is understood, however, that this diversity training may be part of the training described in Paragraph 70.
20

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 24 of 45 PageID #:586
75. Combined has voluntarily created the position of Affirmative Action Manager and agrees to maintain this position during the life of the Consent Decree. Combined agrees that the duties of its Affirmative Action Manager will include, among other things, the development and implementation of the foregoing diversity program. The Affirmative Action Manager will hold a position at Combined's corporate headquarters and report directly to both the Director of Human Resources and the President of Combined.
76. With the assistance of the Affirmative Action Manager, the Director of Human Resources shall oversee the implementation of the non-monetary provisions of this Consent Decree, including provisions relating to the distribution of EEO policies and the implementation of new promotion procedures. Combined's Director of Human Resources and the Affirmative Action Manager shall act as Combined's primary contacts with the Monitors.
D. Complaint Procedures 77. Combined agrees to provide workers in the Seventh Essential Sales Force with mechanisms and procedures designed to provide those workers with convenient, confidential and reliable means for reporting incidents of gender-based harassment, discrimination and/or retaliation. To that end, Combined agrees that it will create three new positions in its Human Resources Department. The persons holding those positions will report directly or indirectly to Combined's Director of Human Resources (currently Nancy Gross). The new positions will be titled "Human Resources Field Area Specialist." A primary purpose of these new positions will be to provide a Human Resources presence in the field to Combined's agents, supervisors and managers. One of these Specialists shall be located on the East Coast, one shall be located in the Mid-West and one shall be located on the West Coast. These Specialists will have duties and responsibilities that include, among other things: (1) serving as a
21

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 25 of 45 PageID #:587
resource for complaints of sexual harassment and/or gender-based discrimination and communicating complaints to Combined's Human Resource Department for investigation; (2) investigating complaints from agents and supervisors of discrimination in the distribution of resources and services in the field such as lead and referral cards, territorial assignments, training and management support, (3) assisting in investigations of complaints made or referred to Combined's Human Resources Department; and (4) periodically attending field meetings as practicable (including Ardmores, sales meetings and other such meetings) to promote compliance with Combined's EEO policies. At meetings they attend, these Specialists will generally provide Human Resource accessibility to agents, supervisors and managers. The names, responsibilities, work locations and telephone numbers of these Specialists shall be disseminated to Combined's work force through a posting on Combined's website and through the EEO Mailing.
78. Combined agrees that it will also designate at least two individuals from its Human Resources Department as persons who may be contacted regarding complaints or concerns relating to discrimination or harassment. The titles, responsibilities, work locations and telephone numbers of these two persons shall be routinely disseminated in the same manner
described in Paragraph 77 above to workers in the Seventh Essential Sales Force. As part of its
complaint procedure, Combined agrees that a 24-hour toll free Ethics hotline shall be maintained on Combined's behalf by one of its corporate affiliates and that Combined shall take seriously anonymous complaints received on the hotline, to the extent investigation is possible based upon the information provided in the anonymous complaint. As part of its complaint procedure, Combined agrees that it shall maintain in its Human Resources Department personnel charged with handling complaints of gender discrimination, gender-based harassment and retaliation.
22

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 26 of 45 PageID #:588
79. Combined shall promptly investigate all complaints concerning alleged
harassment and/or discrimination in the Seventh Essential Sales Force. Specifically, Combined
agrees that it shall make best efforts to investigate all complaints of sexual harassment and/or
retaliation promptly and to complete investigations within five (5) weeks. Combined will further
make best efforts to prepare its written findings of the results of each investigation and the
remedial actions proposed, if any, within fourteen (14) days after completion of the investigation,
and Combined shall thereupon promptly communicate to the complaining party the results of the
investigation and the remedial actions taken or proposed (if any) so long as the complainant
agrees to keep any disciplinary action confidential. The failure of any Combined employee to
maintain such confidentiality will warrant disciplinary action by Combined up to and including
termination.
80. The following procedures will be utilized by Combined in investigating
allegations of gender-based harassment, discrimination or retaliation:
a. All interviews of complainants and alleged harassers will be conducted in person, except in specific circumstances where it is not feasible to do so. In the event that an in-person interview of a complainant or harasser is not feasible, Combined shall set forth in the written report for that investigation the reason or reasons why an in-person interview was not feasible.
b. Interview notes will be summarized in memorandum form ("interview memorandum") and the interviewee will be asked to review the interview memorandum for accuracy. The witness will be given an opportunity to add information he or she believes should be included in the interview memorandum. Interviewed persons will be asked to sign the interview memorandum certifying they have reviewed the notes for accuracy and completeness and been given an opportunity to add information.
c. All interviewed persons will be asked to identify potentially corroborating or contradictory witnesses and those named witnesses will be interviewed in the same manner as described in subsections (a) and (b) above.
d. The written reports will contain credibility assessments if, in the determination ofthe interviewer, such an assessment is possible. If a
23

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 27 of 45 PageID #:589
credibility assessment is made, the basis for that assessment will be provided in the report. If a credibility assessment is not made, the reasons for the failure to make such an assessment will be provided in the report.
e. A record-keeping system will be maintained that can be used to identify complaining parties, accused parties, witnesses interviewed, investigators' recommendations and actions taken.
81. Combined will disseminate its EEO policies and problem-solving procedures to agents, supervisors and managers in the Seventh Essential Sales Force through a posting on Combined's website, periodically reiterating the policies at district, sub-regional and regional meetings (including Ardmores) and distributing the policies to all persons attending Combined's Sales School, JET programs and the advanced EEO training. In addition, Combined will disseminate these materials in the EEO Mailing. Without in any way limiting the foregoing or Combined's obligations hereunder, the Parties acknowledge that Combined's work force is geographically diverse and that Combined's agents and supervisors do not typically maintain central offices or work locations.
82. For the duration of this Consent Decree, Combined will maintain records of all EEO complaints, investigations and all actions taken in response to these complaints. These records will be made available to the Monitors quarterly or upon request.
83. Nothing contained herein shall be construed so as to negate or limit Combined's obligation to be mindful of the rights of all persons (including the accuser, the accused and all witnesses) in the conduct of the foregoing investigations and the imposition of discipline as it is deemed necessary and appropriate.
E. Policies Designed To Promote Supervisor Accountability 84. Combined agrees that it shall impose discipline up to and including suspension, demotion and termination upon any supervisor or manager in the Seventh Essential
24

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 28 of 45 PageID #:590
Sales Force (I) who engages in sexual harassment or gender-based discrimination, (2) who knowingly tolerates any such conduct in his or her presence or among persons under his or her supervision without reporting such conduct to Combined's Human Resources Department or (3) who retaliates against any person who complains or participates in any investigation or proceeding concerning any such conduct. Combined shall communicate this policy to all agents, supervisors and managers.
85. Combined agrees that it shall continue to advise all managers and supervisors in the Seventh Essential Sales Force of their duty to be alert to possible violations of Combined's Anti-Harassment and Anti-Discrimination Policy and to report to Combined's Human Resources Department any incidents, complaints and/or allegations of sexual harassment, gender-based discrimination and/or retaliation of which they become aware. Managers and supervisors who fail to report incidents, complaints or allegations of sexual harassment or gender discrimination will be subject to discipline up to and including suspension, demotion and termination.
86. Combined agrees that for supervisors and managers in the Seventh Essential Sales Force who receive performance reviews, it shall include in those performance evaluations compliance with Combined's Anti-Harassment and Anti-Discrimination Policy and the promotion of diversity in the work place as elements in the review process and link such evaluations directly to a supervisor/managerial bonus structure, to the extent such bonuses are based on factors other than sales performance.
87. Combined will create a new award that recognizes excellence in promoting Combined's commitment to ensuring an environment that is free from discrimination and harassment. This award will be given annually to the person or persons who, in the
25

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 29 of 45 PageID #:591
estimation of Combined's Human Resources Department in consultation with Combined's senior management, contributed the most to ensuring and maintaining a work place free of harassment and discrimination and encouraging diversity. As practicable, this award will be presented by the CEO of Combined.
F. Promotions 88. Combined will reemphasize its commitment to promoting qualified female applicants. To that end, Combined will confirm this commitment as appropriate at Sales School, JET training and in the training described in Paragraph 70. Combined will also create a management network for women that will include (i) a mentoring program and (ii) an outreach program designed to encourage women to pursue promotional opportunities at Combined through the pooling system described in Paragraph 92. 89. For the duration of the Consent Decree and as part of the pooling program described in Paragraph 92, Combined will track promotions in the Seventh Essential Sales Force by gender to the positions of district, sub-regional and regional manager. Records will be maintained setting forth the individuals expressing interest, ultimately considered and then selected for promotion to district, sub-regional and regional manager positions. Combined will prepare semi-annual reports containing this information. These reports will be distributed to the Monitors and Class Counsel. 90. Combined will make best efforts to achieve a level of promotion of females to the positions of district, sub-regional and regional manager that approximately correlates with the number of qualified female applicants for those positions who have placed their names and resumes in the pools described in Paragraph 92. The foregoing, however, shall
26

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 30 of 45 PageID #:592
not be construed or otherwise understood to impose any sort of quotas on Combined or to completely eliminate the discretion of management.
91. Objective written criteria for promotion to district, sub-regional and regional manager positions in the Seventh Essential Sales Force will be distributed at Combined's Sales School, posted on Combined's website, reiterated at JET Training and periodically referenced in Company meetings and newsletters. In addition, it will be included in the EEO Mailing.
92. For the positions of district manager and above, persons who meet the objective criteria referenced in Paragraph 91 may post their resumes and an expression of interest in one or more positions on a website maintained by Combined. In addition, persons who meet the objective criteria may mail or e-mail their resumes to Combined's Director of Human Resources. To maintain current data, persons expressing interest will be required to repost their resumes annually on January 15th or some other date as established by Combined. Combined's promotion posting policy will be posted on Combined's website, explained at Combined's Sales School and at JET Training and periodically referenced in Company meetings and newsletters. In addition, it will be included in the EEO Mailing.
93. Combined will make promotion~ from the pool of persons who have submitted a current resume, except in exigent circumstances (~, where the pool in question is empty or where the persons in the pool do not meet the objective criteria for the position at issue). Unless a candidate states otherwise, it will be assumed that submission of a resume is an expression of interest in any available promotion within a region (in the case of candidates for the position of district manager and below) or country (in the case of persons applying for positions at the level of sub-regional manager and above).
27

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 31 of 45 PageID #:593
94. Combined shall maintain records on each job filled through the pool system described in Paragraph 92, including the name and gender of the person selected for the position and the name and gender of each person who applied for but was not selected for that position in the Seventh Essential Sales Force.
G. Compensation 95. Combined will make best efforts to ensure that resources and opportunities are equitably distributed. To that end, Combined agrees that the need to equitably distribute resources(~, referral and lead cards) will be emphasized in training for its supervisors and managers, as will the need to be sensitive in the assignment process to the individual preferences and availability of agents. Combined further agrees that one of the principal duties of the Human Resources Field Area Specialists (referenced in Paragraph 77) will be to field, address and investigate complaints and concerns from agents and supervisors regarding the distribution of resources, and agents and supervisors will be apprised of this resource and function of the Human Resources Field Area Specialists at Combined's Sales School and in JET.
H. The Monitors 96. Upon final approval of this Consent Decree by the Court, two Monitors will be appointed to oversee the implementation by Combined in the Seventh Essential Sales Force of the terms of this Consent Decree. For the term of this Consent Decree, the Monitors will have authority under Court supervision to assess and monitor Combined's compliance with the terms of this Consent Decree. 97. The programs and procedures subject to oversight by the Monitors shall include the efficacy of Combined's complaint procedure, the quality of investigations undertaken in response to complaints as well as the propriety of the discipline (if any) imposed as a result of
28

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 32 of 45 PageID #:594
such investigations. This includes responsibility for periodically reviewing allegations of sexual harassment, gender-based discrimination and retaliation and Combined's response to these allegations, including but not limited to Combined's investigation of the allegations and actions taken in response to the investigation. The Monitors shall also monitor the efficacy and success of the pooling program described in Paragraph 92 as a means of allowing qualified female applicants interested in advancement to pursue supervisory and management positions in the Seventh Essential Sales Force. In addition, the Monitors shall periodically review individual promotion decisions at the level of district manager and above for which a woman had submitted a resume to ensure that Combined is complying with the letter and spirit oftbis Consent Decree.
98. In the event that the Monitors conclude that Combined has materially failed to meet its commitment under this Consent Decree to undertake effective investigations and impose appropriate discipline as called for by the circumstances presented, the Monitors may bring their views in this regard to the attention of Class Counsel. Class Counsel may then raise the issue with Combined, and Combined and Class Counsel will make a good faith effort to resolve any perceived problems in the manner contemplated by the dispute resolution procedure set forth herein at Paragraph 107. If a resolution carmot be reached between Combined and Class Counsel, Class Counsel may then raise the issue with the Court, with the burden being on Class Counsel to prove by a preponderance of the evidence a material deviation from the procedures set forth in Section X-D. The Court shall award Class Counsel reasonable fees and costs if they are the prevailing party. In no event, however, shall Class Counsel seek an award in excess of $50,000, nor shall Combined be obligated to pay any award in excess of $50,000. Combined may petition the Court to award fees if it can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the action was frivolous or that Class Counsel acted in bad faith.
29

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 33 of 45 PageID #:595
99. In the event that the Monitors conclude that Combined has materially failed to meet its commitment to maintain the pooling system described in Paragraph 92 and to promote qualified female applicants who express interest to the positions of district, sub-regional and regional manager in numbers approximately proportional to the representation of qualified female applicants in the pools described in Paragraph 92, the Monitors may bring their views in this regard to the attention of Class Counsel. Class Counsel may then raise the issue with Combined, and Combined and Class Counsel will make a good faith effort to resolve any perceived problems in the manner contemplated by the dispute resolution procedure set forth herein at Paragraph 107. If a resolution cannot be reached between Combined and Class Counsel, Class Counsel may then raise the issue with the Court with the burden being on Class Counsel to prove by a preponderance of the evidence a material deviation from the procedures called for by Section X-F. In no event, however, shall any such request for fees and costs exceed $50,000. Combined may petition the Court to award fees if it can prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the action was frivolous or that Class Counsel acted in bad faith.
100. The Monitors shall be agreed to by the Parties. If the Parties are unable to agree on the Monitors before the date of the final fairness hearing, the Parties agree to engage in non-binding mediation with the Court. If the parties still do not agree, any of the Parties may void this agreement within seven (7) days of the final fairness hearing.
101. On the first anniversary of the Effective Date and on each annual anniversary date thereafter until the Consent Decree expires, the Monitors shall complete their own review of Combined's compliance with this Consent Decree and shall submit a confidential status report to Class Counsel and Combined setting forth Combined's progress in meeting its obligations under this Consent Decree. This report must include the Monitors' conclusions
30

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 34 of 45 PageID #:596
regarding the effectiveness of the complaint, promotion and training procedures implemented by Combined.
I 02. Combined shall cooperate with the Monitors in connection with their efforts to oversee and monitor compliance with the Consent Decree, including providing access to all documents and persons the Monitors consider relevant as well as other sources of information, in whatever form they are maintained in the ordinary course of business,. The Monitors shall use their best efforts to minimize the disruption to the workplace during the course of their oversight. Given the need of the Monitors to review confidential business information of Combined, the Monitors will sign a confidentiality agreement.
I03. Combined shall be responsible for the implementation of all non-monetary relief under the terms of this Consent Decree, except as otherwise provided herein. Combined shall not be precluded from developing and implementing its own programs as it may deem appropriate. In formulating their determinations and recommendations, the Monitors will take such programs into account.
I04. Combined shall compensate the Monitors at their customary rate or upon other terms acceptable to the Monitors. Combined shall also pay any and all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the Monitors as is necessary to fulfill their duties.
I 05. The work of the Monitors shall continue for the full term of this Consent Decree, unless extended. In the event the Monitors are unable or unwilling to continue to serve for the full term of the Consent Decree, then Combined and Class Counsel shall jointly designate another person to serve in their stead.
31

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 35 of 45 PageID #:597
XI. ENFORCEMENT OF THE CONSENT DECREE AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES A. Enforcement Of The Consent Decree
I 06. Within two (2) weeks after final approval of this Consent Decree, Combined shall post on the agent's website a notice in the form of Exhibit A attached to this Consent Decree. In the event that the person and/or departments to whom individuals should make complaints alleging sexual discrimination, gender-based harassment and/or retaliation change during the term ofthe Consent Decree such that the information contained on the Notice is no longer accurate, Combined shall immediately notify Class Counsel, who shall then prepare and deliver to Combined a new notice that contains correct information. Combined shall thereupon promptly replace the old notices with the revised notices. Combined shall also provide a copy of the Consent Decree to any agent, supervisor or manager in the Seventh Essential Sales Force who requests one.
B. Dispute Resolution I 07. In the event that the Parties to this Consent Decree or any member of the Settlement Class believes that another party has failed to comply with any provision of the Consent Decree, the complaining party shall notifY the alleged non-complying party in writing of such non-compliance and afford the alleged non-complying party forty-five (45) days to remedy the non-compliance or satisfY the complaining party that the alleged non-complying party has complied. If the allegedly non-complying party has not remedied the alleged non-compliance or satisfied the complaining party that it has complied within the foregoing period, the complaining party may apply to the Court for appropriate relief. In the event that a dispute is pending upon the expiration date of this Consent Decree, then the term of this Consent Decree shall be
32

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 36 of 45 PageID #:598
extended solely with respect to the issue in dispute, until such time as such dispute is resolved by the Parties or the Court.
XII. MONETARY RELIEF, NOTICE AND CLAIMS PROCEDURE A. The Settlement Amount
I 08. All monetary claims, including those for attorneys fees costs and expenses, resolved by this Consent Decree shall be settled for the total sum of $8.5 million (the "Settlement Amount"), which shall be allocated as follows:
a. The Named Plaintiffs shall receive a total of $480,000; b. The two class representatives, Traci Radmanovich and Brenda Palmer, shall each receive $90,000 in settlement of their individual claims and $20,000 as an incentive payment for their assistance in the litigation, for a total of $110,000 each; c. The Hamilton Claimants shall receive a total of $1,770,000; d. Class counsel shall receive such amounts as the Court awards for attorneys fees, not to exceed $1,280,000 and such amounts as the Court awards for costs of litigation, not to exceed $750,000; and e. The balance of $4,000,000 shall be allocated to the Settlement Class as set forth below in Sections XII-B and XII-C. I09. Class Counsel specifically agrees not to seek a multiplier in their petition for fees and reimbursement of the costs of litigation. Combined specifically agrees not to object to Class Counsel's petition for fees and reimbursement of the costs oflitigation. II 0. With respect to FICA, FUTA and SUTA tax payments, Combined, the Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class will each bear their own respective tax liabilities as employer and employees. Combined will pay the employer portions of such taxes (as applicable) in addition to and not out of the Settlement Fund.
33

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 37 of 45 PageID #:599
Ill. Within fifteen (15) days of the issuance of any Court Order directing payment to Class Counsel and/or the Named Plaintiffs, Combined shall issue checks in accordance with the Order. Class Counsel shall provide Combined with the exact amount due Class Counsel and the Named Plaintiffs thirty (30) days before the final fairness hearing. It is further the understanding of the Parties that the issuance by the Court of the order directing payment to Class Counsel, the Named Plaintiffs and the Hamilton Claimants shall not occur until after the time for any appeals has passed or if an appeal has been filed, that appeal has been resolved or dismissed.
112. Within forty-five (45) days of the issuance of any Court order directing payment to the Hamilton Claimants, Combined shall issue checks in accordance with the Order.
B. Eligibility Requirements 113. Eligible Claimants shall include only those members of the Settlement Class who satisf'y each of the following criteria:
a. The Claimant is a woman who, at any time since April 30, 1999, worked in the Seventh Essential Sales Force of Combined and was a sales agent, supervisor or manager at some point during her career with Combined; and
b. The Claimant completes and timely submits a sworn Claim Form in the form of Exhibit A to the Class Notice, appended hereto as Attachment I, so that it is received no later than _ _ __
C. Procedures To Determine Eligibility And Award Amounts 114. Following the formula set forth herein, Class Counsel shall determine the
eligibility of and amount due (if any) to Eligible Claimants for relief under this Consent Decree. Class Counsel will make this determination by comparing the timely Claim Forms it receives with Combined's employment records. If there is any inconsistency between the two sources, Combined's employment records will be used to determine eligibility.
34

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 38 of 45 PageID #:600

115. All Eligible Claimants will receive a minimum award in the amount of

$250 (the "Initial Payment").

116. With the funds remaining after these Initial Payments (and after the

payments described in Paragraph I 08 above), Eligible Claimants who worked at Combined for

more than 90 days will also be eligible for additional compensation (the "Additional Payment")

based on their tenure of employment with Combined. This amount would be based on an

Eligible Claimant's tenure of employment at Combined, with the amount increasing the longer

that person worked for Combined.

117. The Additional Payment will be calculated by awarding "units" to Eligible

Claimants based on their duration of employment with Combined. Each unit would then be

given a value based on the total number of units and the total amount of money left after all other

payments are made. The units would be awarded to Eligible Claimants as follows:

a.

I unit for Eligible Claimants who worked between 91 days

and 270 days for Combined;

b. 2 units for Eligible Claimants who worked between 271 and 450 days for Combined; and

c. 3 units for Eligible Claimants who worked between 451 and 630 days for Combined.

118. An additional unit will be awarded for each additional 180-day period that

an Eligible Claimant worked for Combined. To determine unit value, the total amount of the

remaining fund would be divided by the total number of units attributable to Eligible Claimants.

That amount would be the value of one unit. By way of example, if there is $2 million

remaining and the participating Eligible Claimants have a total of 800 units, unit value would be

$2,500 ($2 million divided by 800 units). An Eligible Claimant who had one unit, therefore,

35

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 39 of 45 PageID #:601
would be entitled to an Additional Payment of $2,500, two units would be worth $5,000 and so forth.
119. Class Counsel will calculate the amount to be paid to each Eligible Claimant in accordance with this Consent Decree. In determining an Eligible Claimant's tenure of employment with Combined, Class Counsel wiJI compare the duration of employment listed on the Claim Form with Combined's official employment records. If there is any inconsistency between the two sources, Combined's official employment records will be used to determine duration of employment. Class Counsel will submit these calculations to the Court.
120. Within sixty (60) days of the issuance of any Court Order directing payment to Class Members, Combined shall issue checks in accordance with the Order. Combined shall include with the check a Jetter to each Claimant stating "It has been determined that you are an Eligible Claimant under the Radmanovich v. Combined and Palmer v. Combined Consent Decree and have been awarded a gross award of$__. The enclosed check represents this amount minus applicable taxes."
121. Combined shall promptly notify Class Counsel in writing of any checks that are returned or are not cashed after a period of one hundred eighty (180) days has elapsed from the date on which the settlement checks were mailed by Combined. Class Counsel may take further steps to reach those Eligible Claimants who did not receive and/or deposit their settlement checks.
XIII. CONFIDENTIALITY OF AWARDS/STATEMENTS TO THE PRESS 122. The Parties, Class Counsel, Plaintiffs, and Class Members shall not
disclose to anyone the amount of any settlement check received under the terms of this Consent Decree, except (a) to the extent that these amounts are part of the public record or (b) that a
36

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 40 of 45 PageID #:602
person receiving a check may reveal the allocated settlement amount that she received to her spouse, accountant, financial advisor, tax advisor or attorney, who shall be informed by the person receiving the check of this confidentiality requirement and be bound by it.
123. The Parties further agree they shall not disclose or cause to be disclosed any portion of the negotiations or any other non-public discussions related to this Consent Decree to the media or any other person or entity. This shall not prevent Class Counsel or counsel for Combined from addressing matters otherwise in the public record in professional contexts, such as in seminars or other legal training environments. The Parties and Class Counsel agree, however, that no statements shall be made to the press or media that are not preapproved by Class Counsel and Combined.
XIV. NOTICE TO THE CLASS, OBJECTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS A. Notice
124. Following Preliminary Approval by the Court on or about August 3, 2004, the following actions shall be taken to effectuate notice to the class:
125. Within ten (10) days after preliminary approval, Combined shall prepare and deliver to Class Counsel a computer disk containing the full names, social security numbers, last-known addresses and last-known telephone numbers of all Class Members together with each person's start date and (if applicable) end date of employment with Combined (the "Class List"). Within seven (7) days thereafter, Class Counsel shall mail, via first class United States Mail, postage prepaid, a Notice of the Class Settlement (Attachment I hereto), claim form, W-9 Form and opt-out statement to each person on the Class List.
126. Unless specified elsewhere in this Consent Decree, Class Counsel shall be responsible for administering the claims process. All expenses related to Class Counsel's
37

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 41 of 45 PageID #:603
administration of the claims process portion of this Settlement including all mailing fees and other expenses shall be paid out of the Settlement Fund. All other expenses are to be borne by Combined.
B. Objections And Exclusions 127. Class Members who wish to present objections to the proposed settlement must do so in writing. Written objections shall be mailed to Class Counsel and must be received by Class Counsel on or before ___. Class Counsel shall stamp the date received on the original of any objection they receive and serve copies of the objections on Combined's counsel not later than three (3) business days after receipt thereof, and Class Counsel shall file the datestamped originals of any objections with the Clerk of Court no later than fifteen (15) business days prior to the date of the Final Approval hearing, which shall be scheduled (if possible) on or about November I, 2004. Persons who file objections shall nonetheless be eligible to file Claims Forms and shall be bound by the same time periods as all other persons. 128. Consistent with Paragraph 53 of this Consent Decree certifying the Settlement Class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) for purposes of monetary relief, any member of the Settlement Class may request exclusion from the class for purposes of monetary relief only. 129. Class Members who wish to exclude themselves from membership in the Settlement Class for purposes of participation in the monetary portion of the settlement must do so in writing by filing with Class Counsel a signed and dated "Opt-Out" statement (Exhibit B to Attachment I hereto), stating in substance that they wish to be excluded from the monetary settlement. Written opt-out statements shall be mailed to the Class Counsel and must be received
38

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 42 of 45 PageID #:604
on or before _____,. Only those persons who request exclusion in the time and manner set forth herein shall be excluded from the class.
130. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) and (c)(2), the terms and provisions of this Consent Decree concerning monetary relief shall have no binding effect on any person who makes a valid and timely request for exclusion in the manner required by this Consent Decree.
131. In the event that (a) any of the Plaintiffs refuses to execute a Release of Claims; or (b) more than three (3) of the Hamilton Claimants refuses to execute a Release of Claims; or (c) more than twenty-four (24) members of the Settlement Class elect to "opt-out" for purposes of participation in the monetary portion of this settlement, Combined may, solely at its option, void this Consent Decree. Combined shall notify Class Counsel of its decision to void this Consent Decree at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date set by the Court for the Final Approval hearing. In the event that Combined elects to void this Consent Decree, Combined shall also notify the Court of its decision; however, it shall have no further obligations under this Consent Decree and all monies (including, without limitation, any attorneys' fees) paid pursuant to this Consent Decree (other than monies for the costs and expenses of the Settlement) shall be immediately refunded or released to Combined.
XV. CONFIDENTIALITY OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO CLASS COUNSEL UNDER THE TERMS OF THIS CONSENT DECREE 132. All records, reports and other documents produced by Combined pursuant
to formal discovery, informal discovery, the earlier mediation efforts and this Consent Decree shall be retrieved from Class Counsel by Combined within thirty (30) business days of the deadline for filing any appeals.
39

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 43 of 45 PageID #:605
XVI. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. Calculation Of Time
133. In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by this Consent Decree, such computation or calculation shall be made consistent with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure unless otherwise stated.
B. Counterparts 134. This Consent Decree may be executed in one or more counterparts and each executed copy shall be deemed an original, which shall be binding upon all parties hereto.
C. Persons Bound By Consent Decree 13 5. The terms of this Consent Decree are and shall be binding upon the Plaintiffs and all members of the Settlement Class who do not opt-out of the settlement, their heirs, assigns, spouses and beneficiaries. It is also binding upon Combined and its present and future representatives, agents, directors, officers, assigns and successors.
D. Construction 136. The terms of this Consent Decree are the product of joint negotiations and shall not be construed as having been authored by one party rather than another.
E. Integration 137. This Consent Decree constitutes the entire agreement between Combined and Class Counsel hereto with respect to the matters herein, and it supersedes all negotiations, representations, comments, contracts and writings prior to the date of this Consent Decree. XVII. MODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY OF THE CONSENT DECREE 138. Whenever possible, each provision and term of this Consent Decree shall be interpreted in such a manner as to be valid and enforceable; provided, however, that in the
40

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 44 of 45 PageID #:606
event any provision or term of this Consent Decree should be determined to be or rendered invalid or unenforceable (by an Act of Congress or otherwise), all other provisions and terms of this Consent Decree and the application thereof to all persons and circumstances subject thereto shall remain unaffected to the extent permitted by law. If any application of any provision or term of this Consent Decree to any person or circumstance should be determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the application of such provision or term to other persons and circumstances shall remain unaffected to the extent permitted by law.
139. Combined and Class Counsel may jointly agree to modify the Consent Decree with the approval of the Court.
140. Combined and Class Counsel shall make a good faith effort to defend this Consent Decree from any legal challenge whether by appeal, collateral attack or objection.
XVIII. NOTICES 141. All notices and other communications required under this Consent Decree shall be in writing and delivered either personally, by commercial carrier or by depositing the same, postage prepaid, in the United States Mail, addressed to the party hereto to whom the same is directed at the-following addresses: To the Plaintiffs and Settlement Class:
Patricia C. Benassi, Esq. Benassi & Benassi, P.C. 300 N.E. Perry Avenue Peoria, Illinois 61603 (309) 674-3556 Thomas R. Meites, Esq. Joan H. Burger, Esq. Meites, Mulder, Burger & Mollica 208 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 1410 Chicago, Illinois 60604 (312) 263-0272
41

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 Document #: 111 Filed: 01/12/05 Page 45 of 45 PageID #:607

To Combined Insurance Company of America
Margaret L. Parker, Esq. Piper Rudnick LLP 333 Market Street, Suite 3200 San Francisco, California 94105 (415) 777-3999
Mark S. Mester, Esq. Latham & Watkins LLP 233 South Wacker Drive Suite 5800 Sears Tower Chicago, Illinois 60606 (312) 876-7700
Combined Insurance Company of America Attention: Law Department 1000 Milwaukee Avenue Glenview, Illinois 60025 (847) 953-2025
142. The Parties may from time to time change their address for the purpose of
this Section by providing written notice, return receipt requested, of such change to the other
Party.

Date:_ __cr_-_,__p _-_19...:..~----
Counsel for Plaintiffs

I Jv+-"'-"-/Q_S'_ _ J Date:--'----+-/""--=---!
7

America

42

 
 Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 1 of 15
KEYS, PROTO
United States District Court Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 4.1.1 (Chicago)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:01−cv−09502

Radmanovich, et al v. Combined Ins Co Assigned to: Honorable James B. Zagel Demand: $0 Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 12/13/2001 Date Terminated: 02/03/2005 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Traci Radmanovich on behalf of herself and others similarly situated

represented by Joan Harlow Burger Meites, Mulder, Burger &Mollica 208 South LaSalle Street Suite 1410 Chicago, IL 60604 (312) 263−0272 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas R. Meites Meites, Mulder, Mollica &Glink 20 South Clark Street Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 263−0272 Fax: (312) 263−2942 Email: tmeites@mmbmlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Athena Marie Papachronis Benassi &Benassi, P.C. 300 N.E. Perry Avenue Peoria, IL 61603 (309) 674−3556

Bonnie Lou Beck−Fries Attorney at Law 5407 South 72nd Court Summit, IL 60501 (708) 458−9665 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Johanna J. Raimond Law Offices of Johanna J. Raimond Ltd. 415 S. Dearborn St. #1002 Chicago, IL 60605 (312) 235−6959 Email: jraimond@raimondlaw.com TERMINATED: 03/09/2006 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Patricia Benassi Benassi &Benassi P.C. 301 Northeast Perry Avenue Peoria, IL 61603 309−674−3556 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul William Mollica

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 2 of 15

Meites, Mulder, Burger &Mollica 20 S. Clark Street #1500 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 263−0272 Email: pwmollica@mmbmlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Sharon K Novak Meites, Mulder, Burger &Mollica 1100 North Dearborn Suite 1205 Chicago, IL 60610 (312) 310−3201 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Shona B. Glink Meites, Mulder, Mollica &Glink 20 South Clark Street Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60603 (312) 263−0272 Email: sbglink@mmmglaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Martha Mausshardt TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Brenda Palmer TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 3 of 15

Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Vicky Miller TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Maria Eason TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 4 of 15

Plaintiff Elke Budreau TERMINATED: 02/12/2002
Plaintiff Bonnie Shaffer TERMINATED: 02/12/2002
Plaintiff Patricia Schams TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002
Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002
Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 5 of 15

LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Terry Boebel TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
Cathy Aloffo on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

represented by Joan Harlow Burger (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Thomas R. Meites (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Johanna J. Raimond (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002

Patricia Benassi (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/12/2002 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 6 of 15
Paul William Mollica (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V.
Defendant
Combined Insurance Company of America

represented by Adrianne Clarise Mazura DLA Piper US LLP IL 203 North LaSalle Street 20th Floor Chicago, IL 60601 (312) 368−4000 Email: adrianne.mazura@quarles.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Douglas Robert Stevens Attorney at Law 200 East Randolph Street 8th Floor Chicago, IL 60601 (312) 381−5155 TERMINATED: 08/29/2002 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kevin Mark Murphy Latham &Watkins LLP (IL) 233 South Wacker Drive 5800 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 876−7700 Email: kevin.murphy@lw.com TERMINATED: 03/16/2004 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
B. John Casey Latham &Watkins LLP (IL) 233 South Wacker Drive 5800 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 876−7700 Email: john.casey@lw.com TERMINATED: 03/16/2004
John P. Lynch Latham &Watkins LLP (IL) 233 South Wacker Drive 5800 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 876−7700 Email: john.lynch@lw.com TERMINATED: 03/16/2004
Mark Steven Mester Latham &Watkins LLP (IL) 233 South Wacker Drive 5800 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 876−7700 Email: mark.mester@lw.com TERMINATED: 03/16/2004

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 7 of 15

Matthew Rawlinson Latham &Watkins LLP (IL) 233 South Wacker Drive 5800 Sears Tower Chicago, IL 60606 (312) 876−7700 Email: matt.rawlinson@lw.com TERMINATED: 03/16/2004
Patrick E. Gibbs Latham &Watkins LLP (CA−Menlo) 140 Scott Drive Menlo Park, CA 94025 (312) 876−7700 TERMINATED: 03/16/2004
Robert Bruce Slocum Aon Corporation 200 East Randolph 8th Floor Chicago, IL 60601 (312) 381−5158 TERMINATED: 08/29/2002
Tracy Lee Bradford Quarles &Brady LLP 300 N. LaSalle St. Suite 4000 Chicago, IL 60654 (312) 715−5214 Email: tracy.farley@quarles.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 12/13/2001
12/13/2001 12/14/2001 12/17/2001
12/21/2001 12/21/2001 01/04/2002
02/01/2002 02/01/2002

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT; jury demand − Civil cover sheet − Appearance(s) of Thomas R. Meites, Johanna Josie Raimond as attorney(s) for plaintiffs (One original and one copy summons(es) issued.) ( Documents: 1−1 through 1−3) (hp) (Entered: 12/13/2001)
RECEIPT regarding payment of filing fee paid; on 12/13/01 in the amount of $150.00, receipt #107393. (hp) (Entered: 12/13/2001)
2 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiffs by Joan Harlow Burger, Patricia Benassi (yap) (Entered: 12/17/2001)
3 REASSIGNMENT ORDER of 12/17/01 This case is reassigned from Hon. Elaine E. Bucklo to the Hon. James H. Alesia by lot. (For further detail see order.) Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 12/19/2001)
4 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Douglas Robert Stevens, Robert Bruce Slocum (yap) (Entered: 01/07/2002)
5 MOTION by defendant for enlargment of time to answer or otherwise plead to plaintiffs' complaint ; Notice (yap) (Entered: 01/07/2002)
6 MINUTE ORDER of 1/4/02 by Hon. Elaine E. Bucklo: Defendant's motion for extension of time to answer or otherwise plead to plaintiffs' complaint until 2/3/02 [5−1] is granted. Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 01/07/2002)
7 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Mark Steven Mester, John P. Lynch, Patrick E. Gibbs, Matthew Rawlinson (yap) (Entered: 02/04/2002)
8 MOTION by defendant for attorney Shand S. Stephens to appear pro hac vice (Attachment); Notice (yap) (Entered: 02/06/2002)

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 8 of 15

02/01/2002 02/01/2002 02/05/2002
02/08/2002 02/11/2002 02/12/2002
02/26/2002 03/05/2002 03/12/2002 03/22/2002 03/22/2002 03/26/2002
04/01/2002 04/05/2002 04/16/2002 04/16/2002 04/16/2002

9 MOTION by defendant for leave to file additional appearance Mark S. Mester, John P. Lynch, Patrick E. Gibbs and Matthew Rawlinson (Attachment); Notice (yap) (Entered: 02/06/2002)
10 AGREED MOTION by defendant for an extension of time in which to answer or otherwise plead to plaintiff's complaint ; Notice (yap) (Entered: 02/06/2002)
11 MINUTE ORDER of 2/5/02 by Hon. James H. Alesia: Plaintiff is given 2/20/02 to file an amended complaint. See Bailey, et al vs. Northern Trust Co, 1996 F.R.D. 513 (N.D. Ill.2000). Defendant's motion for admission pro hac vice of Shand S. Stephens [8−1] is granted. Defendant's motion for leave to file additional appearance of Mark S. Mester, John P. Lynch, Patrick E. Gibbs and Matthew Rawlinson as additional counsel for defendant [9−1] is granted. Defendant's agreed motion for an extension of time to 3/7/02 in which to answer or otherwise plead to plaintiff's complaint [10−1] is granted. Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 02/06/2002)
13 MOTION by plaintiffs that the court dismiss without prejudice all but the first named plaintiff per its 2/5/02 order or reconsider that order (Attachment); Notice (yap) (Entered: 02/15/2002)
12 RESPONSE by defendant to plaintiffs' February 8, 2002 motion (yap) (Entered: 02/12/2002)
14 MINUTE ORDER of 2/12/02 by Hon. James H. Alesia: Status hearing set to 3/26/02 at 9:30 a.m. Plaintiffs' motion that the court dismiss without prejudice all but the first named plaintiff per its 2/5/02 order [13−1] or reconsider that order [13−2] is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiffs Martha Mausshardt, Brenda Palmer, Vicky Miller, Maria Eason, Elke Budreau, Bonnie Shaffer, Patricia Schams, Terry Boebel and Cathy Aloffo are dismissed without prejudice as parties plaintiff. Remaining plaintiff Radmanovich is given to 2/27/02 to file an amended complaint; defendant is given ten days thereafter to answer or othewise plead. terminating plaintiffs party Cathy Aloffo, Terry Boebel, Patricia Schams, Bonnie Shaffer, Elke Budreau, Maria Eason, Vicky Miller, Brenda Palmer and Martha Mausshardt Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 02/15/2002)
15 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT−class action [1−1] by plaintiff; jury demand; Notice. (hmb) (Entered: 02/27/2002)
16 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 2/5/02 Before Honorable James H. Alesia (yap) (Entered: 03/05/2002)
17 ANSWER and affirmative defenses by defendant to plaintiff's first amended complaint [15−1] (yap) (Entered: 03/13/2002)
18 MOTION by defendant for clarification of status of subsequently−filled complaints ; Notice (yap) (Entered: 03/27/2002)
19 EXHIBITS by defendant motion to defendant's motion for clarification of status of subsequently−filled complaints [18−1] (Attachments) (yap) (Entered: 03/27/2002)
20 MINUTE ORDER of 3/26/02 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing held and continued to 4/16/02 at 9:30 a.m. Defendant's motion for clarification of status of subsequently−filled complaints [18−1] is granted. As the other nine lawsuits do not involve the same facts, do not grow out of the same transaction or occurrence, this court will not take them as related cases L.R.40.4. The cases were splilt as an improper joinder. Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 03/27/2002)
ALIAS SUMMONS issued as to defendant (2 other in care of defendant; Registering Agent CT Corp &IL Dept of Ins (yap) (Entered: 04/03/2002)
ALIAS SUMMONS issued as to defendant (yap) (Entered: 04/08/2002)
21 MOTION by defendant to strike class allegations (yap) (Entered: 04/16/2002)
22 MEMORANDUM by defendant in support of his motion to strike class allegations [21−1] (yap) (Entered: 04/16/2002)
23 EXHIBITS by defendant Combined Ins Co to memorandum in support of his motion to strike class allegations [22−1] (yap) (Entered: 04/16/2002)

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 9 of 15

04/16/2002
04/30/2002 05/03/2002 05/07/2002 05/21/2002 06/04/2002 06/10/2002 06/13/2002 08/05/2002 08/06/2002 08/08/2002 08/15/2002
08/27/2002 08/29/2002
10/31/2002 01/02/2003 01/09/2003 01/09/2003
01/30/2003 02/03/2003

24 MINUTE ORDER of 4/16/02 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing held. Defendant's motion to strike class allegations [21−1] is to be filed on 4/16/02; answer due 4/30/02; reply due 5/7/02; rule by mail. Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 04/17/2002)
25 BRIEF IN RESPONSE by plaintiff to defendant's motion to strike class allegations [21−1] (Attachments) (yap) (Entered: 05/01/2002)
26 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 4/16/02 Before Honorable James H. Alesia (yap) (Entered: 05/06/2002)
27 REPLY memorandum by defendant [21−1] (yap) (Entered: 05/08/2002)
28 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 3/26/02 Before Honorable James H. Alesia (yap) (Entered: 05/22/2002)
29 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Bernard John Casey (yap) (Entered: 06/05/2002)
30 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiffs by Paul William Mollica (yap) (Entered: 06/11/2002)
31 MINUTE ORDER of 6/13/02 by Hon. James H. Alesia: For the reasons stated on the reverse side of this order, defendant's motion to strike class allegations [21−1] is denied. (See reverse of minute order.) Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 06/14/2002)
33 JOINT MOTION by plaintiff Traci Radmanovich and defendant Combined Ins Co for a stay pending mediation of this case and nine other cases (Attachments); Notice (yap) (Entered: 08/16/2002)
32 AMENDED CERTIFICATE of SERVICE for joint motion for a stay pending mediation. (gcy) (Entered: 08/07/2002)
34 AGREED MOTION by defendant Combined Ins Co for entry of protective order Notice (yap) (Entered: 08/16/2002)
35 MINUTE ORDER of 8/15/02 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing set for 11/7/02 at 9:30 a.m. Joint motion for a stay pending mediation of this case and nine other cases [33−1] is granted; case is stayed 90 days. Defendant's Agreed Order for entry of protective order [34−1] is granted. (Entered Stipulation and Protective Order). Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 08/16/2002)
36 MOTION by defendant to withdraw the appearances of Douglas R. Stevens and Robert B. Slocum ; Notice (yap) (Entered: 08/30/2002)
37 MINUTE ORDER of 8/29/02 by Hon. James H. Alesia: By agreement, defendant's motion to withdraw the appearances of Douglas R. Stevens and Robert B. Slocum as counsel for defendant [36−1] is granted; the firm of Latham &Watkins will continue to represent defendant. Mailed notice (yap) (Entered: 08/30/2002)
SCHEDULE set on 10/31/02 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing reset to 9:30 1/7/03 . Mailed notice (clw) (Entered: 10/31/2002)
SCHEDULE set on 1/2/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing reset to 9:30 1/9/03 . Mailed notice (clw) (Entered: 01/02/2003)
38 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff by Shona B. Glink (lc) (Entered: 01/10/2003)
39 MINUTE ORDER of 1/9/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing held. Discovery cut−off for class certification is 2/10/03. Plaintiffs' oral motion to file plaintiffs' motion for class certification by 05/01/03 is granted; defendant's answer to motion for class certification is due by 05/22/03; reply is due by 06/06/03; rule by mail. Mailed notice (lc) (Entered: 01/10/2003)
41 MOTION by plaintiff for extension of time to conduct class discovery (Attachment); Notice. (lc) (Entered: 02/05/2003)
40 RESPONSE by defendant to plaintiff's motion for an extension of time for class discovery (Attachments). (ntf) (Entered: 02/04/2003)

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 10 of 15

02/04/2003
02/10/2003 04/01/2003 04/02/2003 04/08/2003
04/08/2003 04/22/2003 04/22/2003 05/01/2003 05/01/2003 05/02/2003 05/02/2003 05/02/2003 05/02/2003 05/07/2003 05/08/2003
05/09/2003 05/14/2003 05/14/2003 05/14/2003

42 MINUTE ORDER of 2/4/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to conduct class discovery is granted [41−1]. Discovery cut−off for class certification is extended to 4/25/03. This is a final date. Mailed notice (lc) (Entered: 02/05/2003)
43 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Kevin Mark Murphy (cdy) (Entered: 02/11/2003)
44 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 2/4/03 Before Honorable James H. Alesia. (fce) (Entered: 04/02/2003)
45 AGREED MOTION by plaintiff to file additional appearance of Bonnie Beck−Fries and to file additional appearance pro hac vice of Sharon Novak (Attachments); Notice. (fce) (Entered: 04/11/2003)
46 MINUTE ORDER of 4/8/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Plaintiff's agreed motion as to file the appearance of Bonnie Beck−Fries as additional counsel for plaintiff is granted [45−1], and as to file additional appearance pro hac vice of Sharon Novak is granted subject to submission of the application for leave to appear pro hac vice and payment of the requisite fee [45−2]. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered: 04/11/2003)
47 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff by Bonnie Lou Beck−Fries. (fce) (Entered: 04/11/2003)
48 APPLICATION for leave to appear pro hac vice for plaintiff by Sharon K. Novak; Order entered granting leave by Hon. James H. Alesia (Attachment). (fce) Modified on 04/23/2003 (Entered: 04/23/2003)
49 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff Traci Radmanovich by Sharon Novak. (fce) (Entered: 04/23/2003)
52 MOTION by plaintiff to file a brief in excess of 15 pages instanter . (fce) (Entered: 05/09/2003)
53 MOTION by plaintiff for class certification ; Notice. (fce) (Entered: 05/09/2003)
50 RESPONSE by defendant to plaintiff's motion for leave to file an oversized memorandum (Attachments). (fce) (Entered: 05/05/2003)
54 NOTICE by plaintiff of motion for leave to file a brief in excess of 15 pages instanter [52−1]. (fce) (Entered: 05/09/2003)
55 AMENDED NOTICE by plaintiff of motion for class certification [53−1]. (fce) (Entered: 05/09/2003)
56 MOTION by plaintiff for leave to file a substitute memorandum in support of her motion for class certification ; Notice. (fce) (Entered: 05/09/2003)
51 RESPONSE by defendant to plaintiff's motion for leave to file a substitute memorandum. (fce) (Entered: 05/08/2003)
57 MINUTE ORDER of 5/8/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Plaintiff's motion to file a brief in excess of 15 pages instanter is denied [52−1]. Plaintiff's motion for class certification is withdrawn without prejudice [53−1]. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a substitute memorandum in support of her motion for class certification is withdrawn [56−1]. Plaintiff's motion for class certification supported by a brief not to exceed 15 pages is due by 5/14/03; answer due by 5/28/03; reply due by 6/3/03; rule by mail. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered: 05/09/2003)
58 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 5/8/03 Before Honorable James H. Alesia. (fce) (Entered: 05/12/2003)
59 MEMORANDUM by plaintiff in support of class certification [53−1]. (fce) (Entered: 05/15/2003)
60 EXHIBITS by plaintiff to memorandum [59−1] in support of her motion for class certification (60−1 through 60−5). (fce) (Entered: 05/15/2003)
61 DEPOSITION APPENDIX filed by plaintiff. (fce) (Entered: 05/15/2003)

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 11 of 15

05/28/2003 05/28/2003 05/28/2003 05/29/2003 06/03/2003
06/05/2003 06/05/2003 06/05/2003
06/11/2003
06/12/2003 06/12/2003 06/12/2003 06/13/2003 06/23/2003 06/25/2003 06/26/2003
06/26/2003

62 MEMORANDUM by defendant Combined Ins Co in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification [53−1]. (ntf) (Entered: 05/29/2003)
63 LIST OF EXCERPTED DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS, DISCOVERY RESPONSES AND OTHER MATERIALS CONTAINED ON COMPACT DISK by defendant (ntf) (Entered: 05/29/2003)
64 EXHIBITS by defendant to Combined's memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification [53−1] Volume 1 and II (64−1 through 64−2). (ntf) (Entered: 05/29/2003)
65 MOTION by plaintiff to strike brief in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification (Attachments); Notice. (fce) (Entered: 06/04/2003)
66 MINUTE ORDER of 6/3/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : For the reasons stated on the reverse side of this order, the court grants plaintiff's emergency motion to strike brief [65−1]. The court strikes defendant's memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification [62−1]. Defendant is given until 6/5/03 to file a memorandum that complies with this order. Plaintiff is given until 6/12/03 to reply. (See reverse of minute order.) No notice (fce) (Entered: 06/04/2003)
67 MEMORANDUM by defendant in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification. (fce) (Entered: 06/09/2003)
68 EXHIBITS by defendant to memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification [67−1] (68−1 through 68−2). (fce) (Entered: 06/09/2003)
69 EXCERPTED deposition transcripts, discovery responses and other materials contained on compact disk submitted in connection with Combined's memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification by plaintiff (Attachment). (fce) (Entered: 06/12/2003)
70 MINUTE ORDER of 6/11/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Defendant is given leave to file excerpted deposition transcripts, discovery responses and other materials contained on compact disk submitted in connection with defendant's memorandum in opposition to plaintiff's motion for class certification nunc pro tunc to 6/5/03. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered: 06/12/2003)
71 REPLY memorandum by plaintiff in support of class certification. (fce) (Entered: 06/16/2003)
72 EXHIBITS by plaintiff to reply memorandum in support of class certification [71−1] (72−1 through 72−2). (fce) (Entered: 06/16/2003)
73 LIST of excerpted deposition transcripts contained on compact disc by plaintiff (Attachment). (fce) (Entered: 06/16/2003)
74 MINUTE ORDER of 6/13/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Plaintiff is given leave to file list of excerpted deposition transcripts contained on compact disc nunc pro tunc to 6/12/03. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered: 06/16/2003)
76 MOTION by plaintiff to correct filings (Attachment); Notice. (fce) (Entered: 06/27/2003)
75 RESPONSE by defendant to plaintiff's motion to correct recent filings (Attachments). (fce) (Entered: 06/26/2003)
77 MINUTE ORDER of 6/26/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Plaintiff's motion to correct filings is granted [76−1]. Defendant's response to said plaintiff's motion is treated as a motion to strike which is granted. Accordingly, all declarations and other new evidentiary material included in plaintiff's 6/12/03 reply memorandum are stricken and all declarations of persons plaintiff refused to make available for said deposition are stricken and disregarded by the court. No notice (fce) (Entered: 06/27/2003)
78 MINUTE ORDER of 6/26/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : The court denies plaintiff's motion for class certification [59−1]. Entered Memorandum Opinion and Order. Telephoned notice (fce) (Entered: 06/27/2003)

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 12 of 15

06/27/2003 07/01/2003 07/07/2003 07/08/2003
07/11/2003 07/15/2003
07/15/2003 07/16/2003 07/22/2003
07/22/2003 07/25/2003 07/29/2003 07/29/2003 07/29/2003 08/04/2003 08/05/2003 08/05/2003

SCHEDULE set on 6/27/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing set to 9:30 7/10/03 . Mailed notice (clw) (Entered: 06/27/2003)
79 MOTION by plaintiff to serve notice under Rule 23(e) and (D)(2) and for stay of limitations (Attachments); Notice.(fce) Modified on 07/09/2003 (Entered: 07/09/2003)
81 RESPONSE by defendant to plaintiff's motion to serve notice under Rule 23(e) and (D)(2) [79−1] and for a stay of limitations [79−2] (Attachments). (fce) (Entered: 07/09/2003)
80 MINUTE ORDER of 7/8/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Plaintiff's reply to her motion to serve notice under Rule 23(e) and (D)(2) [79−1] and for stay of limitations [79−2] is due by 7/11/03; rule by mail. Status hearing set for 7/10/03 is stricken. Discovery cut−off date is 11/12/03 which includes experts, if any. Final pretrial order is to be submitted in open court on 12/11/03 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered: 07/09/2003)
82 REPLY by plaintiff in support of motion to serve notice under Rule 23(e) and (D)(2) [79−1] and for stay of limitations [79−2]. (fce) (Entered: 07/14/2003)
83 MINUTE ORDER of 7/15/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : The court grants in part and denies in part plaintiff's motion to serve notice under Rule 23(e) and (d)(2) [79−1] and for stay of limitations [79−2] as follows: (1) the court grants plaintiff's motion to serve notice under Rule 23(e); (2) the court denies as moot plaintiff's motion to serve notice under Rule 23(d)(2); and (3) the court denies plaintiff's motion for stay of limitations. The court orders plaintiff's counsel to submit a draft Rule 23(e) notice by Tuesday, 7/29/03, for the court's approval. Entered Memorandum Opinion and Order. Telephoned notice (fce) (Entered: 07/16/2003)
85 MOTION by plaintiff for leave to file entry of appearance of Athena M. Papachronis ; Notice. (fce) (Entered: 07/23/2003)
84 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 6/3/03 Before Honorable James H. Alesia. (fce) (Entered: 07/16/2003)
86 MINUTE ORDER of 7/22/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing is set for 7/31/03 at 9:30 a.m. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file entry of appearance of Athena M. Papachronis as additional counsel for plaintiff is granted subject to submitting the application to appear hac vice with payment of the fee unless a member of the U.S. District Court for the N.D. of IL; this court's attorney admissions coordinator could not verify membership [85−1]. Mailed notice (fce) (Entered: 07/23/2003)
87 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiff by Athena Marie Papachronis. (fce) (Entered: 07/23/2003)
SCHEDULE set on 7/25/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Status hearing set for 7/31/03 is stricken. Mailed notice (clw) (Entered: 07/25/2003)
SCHEDULE set on 7/29/03 by Hon. James H. Alesia : Pretrial order date is stricken. Mailed notice (clw) (Entered: 07/29/2003)
EXECUTIVE committee order of 07/29/03 This case is reassigned to the Hon. John W. Darrah Mailed notice (nlf) (Entered: 07/29/2003)
88 FORM of notice regarding denial of class certification (Attachments). (gcy) (Entered: 07/31/2003)
89 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 7/22/03 before Honorable James H. Alesia (las) (Entered: 08/05/2003)
90 MOTION by plaintiff to defer mailing of notice and to stay running of statute of limitations (Attachments); Notice (las) (Entered: 08/06/2003)
91 RESPONSE by defendant to plaintiff's form of notice regarding denial of class certification (Attachments) (las) (Entered: 08/06/2003)

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 13 of 15

08/11/2003
08/12/2003 09/03/2003 09/03/2003 09/08/2003 09/10/2003 10/02/2003
10/03/2003 10/21/2003
02/03/2004 02/13/2004 02/24/2004 03/08/2004 03/16/2004
03/17/2004 03/23/2004 03/30/2004
05/04/2004 05/18/2004 06/23/2004

92 RESPONSE by defendant Combined Ins Co to plaintiffs' 8/5/03 motion to defer mailing of notice and to toll the running of statute of limitations [90−1] (Attachments) (las) (Entered: 08/11/2003)
SCHEDULE set on 8/12/03 by Hon. John W. Darrah : Status hearing set to 9:00 9/3/03 . Mailed notice (smm) (Entered: 08/14/2003)
SCHEDULE set on 9/3/03 by Hon. John W. Darrah : Status hearing held and continued to 9:00 9/17/03 . Mailed notice (ldg) (Entered: 09/03/2003)
SCHEDULE set on 9/3/03 by Hon. John W. Darrah : Status hearing held. No notice (ldg) (Entered: 09/03/2003)
93 RESPONSE by defendant Combined Ins Co to plaintiff's 9/4/03 motion for status regarding reassignment (Attachments) (las) (Entered: 09/09/2003)
94 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 9/3/03 Before Honorable John W. Darrah (las) (Entered: 09/11/2003)
96 REASSIGNMENT ORDER of 10/2/03 This case is reassigned to the Honorable James B. Zagel from Honorable John Darrah pursuant to Rule 13 of the Internal Operating Procedures of this Court . (For further detail see order.) Mailed notice (ntf) (Entered: 10/14/2003)
95 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 07/08/03 Before Honorable James H. Alesia (ntf) (Entered: 10/06/2003)
97 MINUTE ORDER of 10/21/03 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Status hearing set for 2/3/04 at 10:00 a.m. Further proceedings stayed pending mediation. Mailed notice (las) (Entered: 10/22/2003)
SCHEDULE set on 2/3/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Status hearing held and continued to 10:00 2/17/04 . No notice (drw) (Entered: 02/03/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 2/13/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Status hearing reset to 10:00 2/24/04 . Telephone notice (drw) (Entered: 02/13/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 2/24/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Status hearing held and continued to 10:00 5/11/04 . No notice (drw) (Entered: 03/02/2004)
98 MOTION by defendant for leave to substitute counsel for defendant ; Notice (las) (Entered: 03/17/2004)
99 MINUTE ORDER of 3/16/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Motion for leave to substitute counsel will be constured as a motion for leave to file the additional appearances of Adrianne C. Mazura and Tracy L. Bradford. Motion for leave to file additional appearances on behalf of defendant Combined Insurance Company of America is granted [98−1]. Mailed notice (las) (Entered: 03/17/2004)
100 TRANSCRIPT of proceedings for the following date(s): 2/3/04 Before Honorable James B. Zagel (las) (Entered: 03/18/2004)
101 ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Adrianne C. Mazura and Tracy L. Bradford (las) (Entered: 03/24/2004)
102 MINUTE ORDER of 3/30/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Motion to defer mailing of notice and to stay running of statute of limitations is granted [90−1]. Mailed notice (emd) (Entered: 03/31/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 5/4/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Status hearing reset to 10:00 5/19/04 from 5/11/04. Mailed notice (drw) (Entered: 05/04/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 5/18/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Status hearing reset to 10:00 6/23/04 . Telephone notice (drw) (Entered: 05/18/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 6/23/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Status hearing held and continued to 12:00 8/3/04 . Settlement likely. No notice (drw) (Entered: 07/06/2004)

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 14 of 15

08/02/2004 08/03/2004 08/10/2004 09/20/2004 09/27/2004 10/15/2004 10/22/2004 01/10/2005 01/12/2005 01/12/2005 02/01/2005 02/01/2005 02/03/2005
02/03/2005 06/14/2005 06/14/2005 06/16/2005
06/17/2005 02/23/2006 03/03/2006

103 MOTION by plaintiff for preliminary approval of class settlement (Attachments); Notice of motion (eav) (Entered: 08/12/2004)
104 MINUTE ORDER of 8/3/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of class settlement is granted. [103−1] Draft order to follow. No notice (eav) (Entered: 08/12/2004)
105 MINUTE ORDER of 8/10/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Final approval of settlement hearing set for 10/22/04 at 12:00 a.m. (Entered Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement) Telephoned notice (eav) (Entered: 08/12/2004)
106 PETITION by plaintiff for attorney fees , costs and expenses (Attachments) (las) (Entered: 09/21/2004)
107 NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS SETTLEMENT AND HEARING (cdy) (Entered: 09/28/2004)
108 REPORT to the court regarding notice, objectios and opt outs by class counsel. (gcy) (Entered: 10/18/2004)
SCHEDULE set on 10/22/04 by Hon. James B. Zagel : Settlement conference held. No notice (drw) (Entered: 11/08/2004)
109 SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION by plaintiffs for costs of settlement administration [106−1] [106−2] (Attachments). (hp) (Entered: 01/11/2005)
110 MINUTE ORDER of 1/12/05 by Hon. James B. Zagel: (Entered Order Approving Settlement.) Mailed notice (air) (Entered: 01/14/2005)
111 CORRECTED STIPULATION of SETTLEMENT and CONSENT DECREE. (jmp) (Entered: 01/14/2005)
112 MOTION by Plaintiff for entry of judgment and clarification of the 1/12/05 minute orders (las, ) (Entered: 02/02/2005)
113 NOTICE of Motion by Thomas R. Meites for presentment of plaintiff motion to clarification and judgment 112 before Honorable James B. Zagel on 2/3/2005 at 10:15 AM. (las, ) (Entered: 02/02/2005)
114 MINUTE entry before Judge James B. Zagel : Motion to clarify 112 is granted, Motion for judgment 112 is granted, Motion hearing held on 2/3/2005 regarding motion by plaintiff to clarify, motion by defendant for judgment 112 , (drw, ) (Entered: 02/03/2005)
115 MINUTE entry before Judge James B. Zagel : This case is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to settlement. Civil case terminated. (Attachments: # 1 judgment) (drw, ) (Entered: 02/03/2005)
116 UNOPPOSED MOTION by Plaintiff Traci Radmanovich for order directing distribution of the settlement fund. (rbf, ) (Entered: 06/15/2005)
117 NOTICE of Motion by Johanna Josie Raimond for presentment of unopposed motion for order directing distribution of the settlement fund 116 before Honorable James B. Zagel on 6/16/2005 at 10:15 AM. (rbf, ) (Entered: 06/15/2005)
119 MINUTE entry before Judge James B. Zagel : Motion for attorney fees and costs 106 is granted. Motion for an order 116 directing distribution of the settlement fund and to enter the Second Amended Stipulation of Settlement and Consent Decree is granted. Mailed notice (drw, ) (Entered: 06/20/2005)
118 UNOPPOSED MOTION by Plaintiff to include class member Beverly Gibson in the settlement distribution (gma, ) (Entered: 06/17/2005)
120 NOTICE by Johanna Josie Raimond of Change of Address (Raimond, Johanna) (Entered: 02/23/2006)
121 MOTION by Plaintiff Traci Radmanovich to withdraw as attorney (Raimond, Johanna) (Entered: 03/03/2006)

Case: 1:01-cv-09502 As of: 11/23/2010 11:38 AM CST 15 of 15

03/03/2006 03/09/2006 02/12/2007 02/12/2007 02/15/2007

122 NOTICE of Motion by Johanna Josie Raimond for presentment of motion to withdraw as attorney 121 before Honorable James B. Zagel on 3/9/2006 at 10:15 AM. (Raimond, Johanna) (Entered: 03/03/2006)
123 MINUTE entry before Judge James B. Zagel : MOTION by Plaintiff Traci Radmanovich to withdraw as attorney 121 is granted. Attorney Johanna J. Raimond terminated. (drw, ) (Entered: 03/23/2006)
124 MOTION by Defendant Combined Insurance Company of America−− JOINT MOTION for Order Appointing Jane Nolan Denes to Serve as Monitor (Casey, Bernard) (Entered: 02/12/2007)
125 NOTICE of Motion by Bernard John Casey for presentment of motion for miscellaneous relief 124 before Honorable James B. Zagel on 2/15/2007 at 10:15 AM. (Casey, Bernard) (Entered: 02/12/2007)
126 MINUTE entry before Judge James B. Zagel :Motion to appoint Jane Nolan Denes as monitor 124 is granted.Mailed notice (drw, ) (Entered: 02/15/2007)