Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01396/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-01396-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

1 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, 

 PLAINTIFF, 

 AND 

 ELGIRTHA WORTHY, 

 INTERVENOR, 

 V. 

EAST VALLEY DIAGNOSTIC 

IMAGING, L.L.C.; CORINA BING 

AND JOHN DOE BING, HUSBAND 

AND WIFE, 

 DEFENDANTS. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

CIV 06-1396-PHX-SMM 

CONSENT DECREE 

The United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the Commission 

or EEOC) filed this action against East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, L.L.C. (“EVDI” or 

“Defendant”) to enforce Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et 

seq. (Title VII) and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a. In its Complaint, 

the Commission alleged EVDI discriminated against Elgirtha Worthy by racially 

harassing and otherwise discriminating against Elgirtha Worthy because of her race, 

Black. The Commission also alleges EVDI retaliated against Ms. Worthy by subjecting 

her to different terms and conditions of employment. Ms. Worthy moved to intervene as 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 1 of 12
2 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

a plaintiff in this case on November 29, 2006, and that Motion was granted on February 

28, 2007. The Worthy Complaint alleged further claims and also named Corrina Bing, 

one of Defendant’s former employees, and her husband (“Bing Defendants”). EVDI 

denied all allegations of the Complaint and affirmatively alleged that it neither 

discriminated nor retaliated against Ms. Worthy. 

The parties do not object to the jurisdiction of the Court over this action and waive 

their rights to a hearing and the entry of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In the 

interest of resolving this matter and as a result of having engaged in comprehensive 

settlement negotiations, the parties have agreed that this action should be finally resolved 

by entry of this Decree. 

It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: 

1. This Decree resolves all claims of the Commission and Ms. Worthy against 

Defendant and the Bing Defendants, including back pay, compensatory and punitive 

damages, interest, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees and costs (collectively 

“Damages”) arising out of the issues that were or could have been raised in this lawsuit. 

INJUNCTION

2. Defendant, and its officers, agents, employees, successors, assigns and all 

persons in active concert or participation with it, are permanently enjoined for the 

duration of the decree from (a) racially harassing any employee and (b) retaliating against 

any employee because he or she (i) opposed discriminatory practices made unlawful by 

Title VII, (ii) filed a charge or is assisting or participating in the filing of a charge of 

racial harassment or retaliation, or (iii) assisted or participated in an investigation or 

proceeding brought under Title VII. 

MONETARY RELIEF

3. The Parties agree to settle this matter, without an admission of liability or 

wrongdoing by any party. Defendant or its insurer will pay $150,000 to Ms. Worthy. 

The $150,000 is to be paid within fifteen business days after this Consent Decree has 

been entered by the Court. 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 2 of 12
3 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4. Defendant or its insurer will pay the settlement amount by check payable to 

Elgirtha Worthy and Kirtley Wells Law Office (“KWLO”) in trust for Elgirtha Worthy. 

This payment represents a complete settlement and payment in full. 

5. The check provided for in Paragraphs Three and Four of this Decree shall 

be mailed directly by Defendant to KWLO at 3800 N. Central Avenue, Suite 615, 

Phoenix Arizona 85012. Concurrently with the mailing of the check to KWLO 

Defendant shall submit a copy of the check and any related correspondence to the 

Regional Attorney, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 3300 N. Central 

Avenue, Suite 690, Phoenix, Arizona 85012. 

OTHER RELIEF

6. Defendant shall expunge from Ms. Worthy’s personnel file all references to 

her charges of discrimination filed against Defendant or her participation in this action, 

derogatory documents which relate to complaints, or investigation of complaints of racial 

harassment or retaliation. 

7. Within fifteen business days after the Court enters this Decree, the 

Defendant shall provide Ms. Worthy with a written apology, without an admission of 

liability, attached as Attachment A, signed and printed on Defendant’s letterhead. 

8. Defendant shall provide Ms. Worthy with a positive written employment 

reference and pursuant to its policy, will verify her dates of employment when requested 

by a prospective employer. 

9. Defendant shall take prompt, appropriate corrective action against the 

appropriate individuals who participated in, condoned or failed to act upon complaints of 

racial harassment or retaliation purportedly giving rise to the allegations in this case. 

10. Defendant shall institute and carry out policies and practices that help 

assure a work environment free from racial harassment of its employees and that allow 

employees to raise concerns or complaints without retaliation about matters, whether 

alleged, perceived, or actual, made unlawful by Title VII. To assist Defendant in its 

efforts to assure a work environment free of racial harassment and retaliation, Defendant 

shall take the actions provided in Paragraphs Eleven through Twenty of this Decree. 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 3 of 12
4 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DEFENDANT’S CORRECTIVE POLICIES AND PRACTICES

 11. Defendant shall post for the duration of this Decree, in a prominent place 

frequented by its employees at its facilities, the notice attached as Attachment B. The 

notice shall be the same type, style, and size as Attachment B. 

 12. Defendant shall provide training on racial harassment and retaliation, 

according to the following terms: 

 A. Defendant shall retain and pay for a consultant/lecturer who shall 

provide consultation and training for a period of two (2) years from the date of this 

Decree. During each of the next two years, the consultant/lecturer shall conduct one live 

seminar training session each year. Defendant has identified Jay Zweig as its 

consultant/trainer. If Jay Zweig is not available, Defendant will obtain the EEOC’s 

approval for a replacement. All Defendant employees shall attend the seminar sessions in 

each of the two years. Defendant may, at its election, have duplicative videotaped 

sessions to accommodate staffing needs. Defendant shall be responsible for any 

additional costs to provide such duplicative sessions. Jay Zweig or the approved 

replacement consultant/trainer will attend and help facilitate the videotaped sessions. 

 B. During the first year, 2007, the seminar-training session shall be 

conducted within four (4) months of the entry of this Decree. For the second year, the 

seminar-training session shall be conducted between ten (10) and thirteen (13) months 

after the completion of the preceding session. 

 C. The seminar-training sessions shall be no less than ninety (90) 

minutes, plus fifteen (15) to thirty (30) minutes of questions and answers. All personnel 

designated in Paragraph Twelve-A, shall both register and attend the seminar-training 

session. The registry of attendance shall be retained by Defendant for the duration of the 

Decree. 

 D. The seminars shall include, but are no limited to, the subject of what 

constitutes racial harassment and retaliation; that racial harassment and retaliation in the 

hiring, firing, compensation, assignment, or other terms, conditions, or privileges of 

employment, violates Title VII; how to prevent racial harassment and retaliation; how to 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 4 of 12
5 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

provide a work environment free from racial harassment and retaliation; and to whom 

and by what means employees may complain if they feel they have been subjected to 

racial harassment or retaliation in the workplace, including to whom and by what means 

employees may complain if they feel that an officer, executive or Board Member of the 

company is or has subjected them to racial harassment or retaliation. The session shall 

also review and explain Defendant’s policies set out in Paragraph Seventeen of this 

Decree. 

 E. The seminars shall communicate to the employees about the 

discipline that can be taken against officers, supervisors, managers, and employees of 

Defendant who commit acts of racial harassment or retaliation or allow racial harassment 

or retaliation to occur in the workplace, the importance of maintaining an environment 

free of racial harassment and retaliation, and Defendant’s policy in regard to racial 

harassment and retaliation referred to in Paragraph Fourteen of this Decree. A company 

official will also speak. 

 13. The Commission, at its discretion, may designate Commission 

representatives to attend and observe the sessions. The EEOC will provide Defendant 

reasonable advance notice of its intent to attend the training session and no more than two 

EEOC representatives will attend each session. 

 14. Within thirty (30) days of the entry of this Decree, Defendant shall revise 

its written policy concerning racial and other forms of harassment and retaliation to 

conform with the law and shall submit the policy for review to the Regional Attorney of 

the Phoenix District Office of the EEOC. This written policy must include, at a 

minimum: 

 A. A strong and clear commitment to a workplace free of racial 

discrimination and retaliation; 

 B. Clear and complete definitions of racial harassment and retaliation, 

with many relevant examples; 

 C. A clear and strong encouragement of persons who believe they have 

been harassed or retaliated against to come forward; 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 5 of 12
6 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 D. A description of the consequences, up to and including termination, 

that will be imposed upon violators of the policy; 

 E. A promise of appropriate confidentiality for persons who believe 

that they have been harassed or retaliated against; 

 F. An assurance of non-retaliation for witnesses of racial harassment 

and persons who believe they have been racially harassed; 

 G. That racial harassment by all persons, including management 

officials, supervisors, vendors, suppliers, third parties, and customers is prohibited and 

will not be tolerated; 

 H. The identification of specific individuals, with their telephone 

numbers, to whom employees who have been harassed on the basis of their race, or 

retaliated against, can report the problem, including a written statement that the employee 

may report to designated persons outside their chain of management; 

 I. That employees are not to discuss racial jokes while at work; 

 J. Assurances that Defendant will investigate racial harassment and 

retaliation allegations promptly, fairly, reasonably, and effectively by appropriate 

investigators and that appropriate corrective action will be taken by Defendant to make 

victims whole and to eradicate the racial harassment and retaliation. 

 These policies shall be transmitted by Defendant’s CEO and distributed to 

each current employee within thirty (30) days of the entry of the Decree. These policies 

shall be distributed to all new employees when hired and reissued to each employee once 

a year for the term of this Decree. These policies also shall be posted in a prominent 

place frequented by the employees. 

 15. Defendant shall institute a procedure that evaluates supervisors, managers, 

and applicable human resources personnel on their performance in responding to 

employee complaints. The failure of such an employee to enforce the racial harassment 

and anti-retaliation policy must result in disciplinary action. 

 16. Defendant shall promptly and appropriately investigate all complaints of 

racial harassment and/or retaliation. The investigation must include a finding of whether 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 6 of 12
7 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

racial harassment and/or retaliation occurred; a credibility assessment, if necessary; 

interviews of all potential victims and witnesses identified; and concurrent notes of the 

investigation. Defendant shall take immediate appropriate corrective action, to discipline 

harassers and retaliators, and to eradicate the racial harassment and/or retaliation. 

 17. Defendant shall not retain documents related to the investigation of alleged 

racial harassment in any of the alleged victims’ personnel files. All disciplinary actions 

taken against employees for violation of Defendant’s racial harassment and/or antiretaliation policy will be retained in the alleged harasser’s personnel file or in a separate 

investigation file. In those cases in which no conclusion could be reached on the 

allegations, the investigation documents shall remain in the alleged harasser’s personnel 

file or in a separate investigation file. 

REPORTING BY DEFENDANT AND ACCESS BY EEOC

 18. Defendant shall report in writing and in affidavit form to the Regional 

Attorney of the Commission’s Phoenix District Office at 3300 North Central Avenue, 

Suit 690, Phoenix, Arizona 85012, beginning six (6) months from the date of the entry of 

this Decree, and thereafter every six (6) months for the duration of the Decree, the 

following information: 

 A. Any changes, modifications, revocations, or revisions to its policies 

and procedures that concern or affect the subject of racial harassment and/or retaliation; 

 B. The registry of persons attending the seminar required in Paragraph 

Twelve of this Decree and a list of personnel employed by Defendant on the day of the 

seminar-training session; 

 C. A one-time confirmation that (i) the Notice required in Paragraph 

Eleven of this Decree was posted and the locations in which it was posted, (ii) the 

policies required in Paragraph Fourteen of this Decree were posted and distributed to 

each current and new employee, and (iii) the expungement from Ms. Worthy’s personnel 

file required in Paragraph Six of this Decree took place, the date of the expungement, and 

the specific documents expunged; 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 7 of 12
8 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 D. A one-time copy of the revised policy required in Paragraph 

Fourteen of this Decree; 

 E. A one-time copy of the apology letter mailed pursuant to Paragraph 

Seven. 

 19. Defendant shall comply with the reporting requirements of Title VII, 

including but not limited to the filing of Standard Form 100 in accordance with 29 C.F.R. 

§ 1602.7, commonly known as the “Employer Information Report EEO-1.” 

 20. During the term of the Consent Decree, the Commission, upon reasonable 

advance notice, shall have the right to enter and inspect Defendant’s premises to ensure 

compliance with this Consent Decree and Title VII’s prohibition of racial harassment and 

retaliation. 

COSTS AND DURATION

 21. Each party shall bear its costs and attorney’s fees incurred as a result of this 

action through the filing of this Decree. 

 22. The duration of this Decree shall be two (2) years from its entry. The 

parties agree that this matter can be terminated from the Court docket upon signing of the 

Order. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this action for the duration of the Decree 

for the limited purpose of enforcing the Decree, during which the Commission may 

petition this Court for compliance with this Decree. Should the Court determine, after 

reviewing the Commission’s petition and Defendant’s response, that Defendant has not 

complied with this Decree, appropriate relief, including extension of this Decree for such 

a period as may be necessary to remedy Defendant’s non-compliance, may be ordered. 

This Decree shall expire by its own terms at the end of twenty-four (24) months from the 

date of entry, without further action by the parties or the court, at which time this lawsuit 

will be dismissed with prejudice, without further action of the parties or this Court. 

 23. Upon this Court’s entry of this Consent Decree, Mr. Worthy’s Complaint, 

filed February 28, 2007 against EVDI and the Bing Defendants will immediately be 

dismissed with prejudice. 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 8 of 12
9 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

24. The parties agree to entry of this Consent Decree subject to final approval 

by the Court. 

 Dated this 13th day of March, 2007. 

APPROVED AND CONSENTED TO: 

_s/Sally Shanley for___ 

Mary Jo O’Neill 

Regional Attorney 

s/ Sally C. Shanley

Sally C. Shanley 

Supervisory Trial Attorney 

s/ Michelle G. Marshall 

Michelle G. Marshall 

Trial Attorney 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 

Phoenix District Office 

3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690 

Phoenix, Arizona 85012 

(602) 640-5020 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 9 of 12
10 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 

s/ Trisha L. Kirtley 

Trisha L. Kirtley, Esq. 

Kirtley Wells Law Office 

3800 North Central Ave., Suite 615 

Phoenix, AZ 85012-0001 

(602) 264-7424 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Intervenor 

s/ Jay A. Zweig 

Jay Zweig, Esq. 

Gallagher & Kennedy, P.A. 

2575 E. Camelback Road, Suite 1100 

Phoenix, Arizona 85016-9225 

(602) 530-8407 

Attorneys for Defendant 

EAST VALLEY DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, L.L.C 

By s/C. Edward Hancock 

Its Managing Member

. 

 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 10 of 12
11 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ATTACHMENT A 

[to be placed on East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, L.L.C. Letterhead] 

[DATE] 

Ms. Elgirtha Worthy 

[ADDRESS] 

Dear Ms. Worthy: 

As you are aware, a lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity 

Commission and you against East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, L.L.C., alleging that it 

violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act when you were racially harassed and retaliated 

against. East Valley Diagnostic Imaging denies these allegations, but to put this matter 

behind all of us, we have agreed to settle the lawsuit. 

 

Please accept my apology on behalf of East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, L.L.C. for 

any negative treatment that you believe that you endured or complained about while you 

worked for us. Please also accept EVDI’s commitment that the company will take the 

necessary steps to ensure that current and future employees will not be subjected to any 

harassment or retaliation. 

I appreciate the service you provided to EVDI. I wish you the best of luck in the 

future. 

 

Sincerely, 

s/ C. Edward Hancock 

Managing Member 

East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, L.L.C.

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 11 of 12
12 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ATTACHMENT B 

NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES OF 

EAST VALLEY DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, L.L.C. 

It is unlawful under federal law (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended) 

and state law to discriminate against an employee on the basis of race. It is also unlawful 

to retaliate against any person because the person protested discriminatory practices or 

contacted the EEOC. 

East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, L.L.C. will not discriminate against any employee on 

the basis of race and will not retaliate against any employee for complaining about 

discrimination. 

If you believe you have been discriminated against by East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, 

L.L.C., you have the right to seek assistance from: 

 (1) EEOC, 3300 North Central Avenue, Suite 690, Phoenix, Arizona 85012, 

(602) 640-5000; or 

 (2) Arizona Civil Rights Division (ACRD) of the Attorney General's Office, 

1275 W. Washington, Phoenix, Arizona, 85007, (602) 255-5263. 

You have the right to file a charge with the EEOC or ACRD if you believe you are being 

discriminated against. 

No Retaliation Clause. No action may be taken against you by any supervisory or 

management official of East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, L.L.C. for: (1) opposing 

discriminatory practices made unlawful by federal law, (2) filing a charge or assisting or 

participating in the filing of a charge of discrimination, or (3) assisting or participating in 

an investigation or proceeding brought under state or federal law anti-discrimination 

laws. Should any such retaliatory actions be taken against you, you should immediately 

contact the EEOC or the ACRD and the address or telephone numbers listed above. 

Dated: 03-07-07 s/C. Edward Hancock

 Managing Member 

East Valley Diagnostic Imaging, L.L.C. 

Case 2:06-cv-01396-SMM Document 23 Filed 03/14/07 Page 12 of 12