•

•

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
VICTORIA DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY )

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

HALLIDURTON ENERGY SERVICES, )

)

Defendant.

)

Michael N. Milby, Clerk of Court
CIVIL ACTION NO. V - 0 \ - 1 lf
COMPLAINT

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title I ofthe Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and Title I

of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of

disability, and to provide appropriate relief to Kerry Williams who was adversely affected by such

practices. As alleged with greater particularity in paragraphs 8 through 11 below, Plaintiff, Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission, alleges that Defendant, Halliburton Energy Services,

discharged Kerry Williams, a qualified individual with a disability, because of her disability.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S. C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337,

1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 107(a) ofthe

Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C.§ 12117(a), which incorporates

by reference Sections 706(f)(I) and (3) of Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"),

42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3), and pursuant to Section 102 ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991,

42 U.S.C. §1981a.

2.

The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

•

•

jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Victoria Division.
PARTIES 3. Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "Commission"), is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title I of the ADA, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section 107(a) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Halliburton Energy Services, a Texas corporation ("Employer") has continuously been doing business in the State of Texas and the County of Victoria and the City ofVictoria, and has continuously had at least fifteen (15) employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce under Section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C.§ 12111(5), and Section 101(7) ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(7), which incorporates by reference Sections 701(g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(g) and (h). 6. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has been a covered entity under Section
•
101(2) ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2). STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
7. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Kerry Williams, filed a charge with the Commission alleging violations of Title I of the ADA by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.
I
2
ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

•

•

'...
•

8. On or about January 25, 1999, Defendant Employer engaged in unlawful employment practices at their facility located in Victoria, Texas, in violation of Section I02(a) of Title I ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C §12112(a).
9. Kerry Williams suffers from panic anxiety disorder and depression and, as a result, she is substantially limited in one or more major life activities and has a record of being substantially limited in one or more major life activities. In addition, because ofher impaitments, Defendant Employer regarded Kerry Williams as substantially limited in one or more major life activities.
10. Kerry Williams is an individual with a disability, as defined by the ADA. 11. On or about January 25, 1999, Defendant Employer discharged Kerry Williams from her position as a Senior Administrative Specialist, because she is an individual with a disability, as defined by the ADA. 12. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraphs 8 through 11 above has been to deprive Kerry Williams of equal employment opportunities, and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee, because of her disability. 13. The unlawful employment practices complained ofin paragraphs 8 through 11 above were intentional. 14. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 8 through 11 above were done with malice, or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Kerry Williams.

3

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

•

•

PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a pennanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from terminating qualified employees with disabilities, because of their disabilities, and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of disability. B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for qualified individuals with disabilities, and which eradicate the effects of their past and present unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to posting notices regarding their compliance with the ADA. C. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Kerry Williams by providing appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects of their unlawful employment practices. D. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Kerry Williams by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 8 through 11 above, including, but not limited to medical expenses, in amounts to be determined at trial. E. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Kerry Williams by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 8 through 11 above, including, but not limited to, emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment oflife, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined
4
ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

•

•

at trial. F. Order Defendant Employer to pay Kerry Williams punitive damages for their
malicious and reckless conduct, as described in paragraphs 8 through 13 above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public interest.
H. Award the Commission its costs of this action. Respectfully submitted, GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Acting Deputy General Counsel
ROBERT B. HARWIN Regional Attorney D.C. State Bar No. 0760873
LINDA Supervisory Attorney Texas State Bar No. 08642750 Southern District No. 14464
0 Trial Attorney Texas State Bar No. 00790420 Southern District No. 23969 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
COMMISSION San Antonio District Office
5
ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

•

•

5410 Fredericksburg Rd., Ste. 200 San Antonio, TX 78229-3555 (210) 281-7673 (210) 281-7669 FAX
ATTORNEYSFORPLAJNT~

6
ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

 </s> •

•

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

S,TaAfT1ES0CF.C:X.TS

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

VICTORIA DIVISION

AUG 1 5 2001

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY)

COMMISSION,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

v.

)

)

HALLIDURTON ENERGY SERVICES, )

)

Defendant.

)

N.

afCourt

CIVll.. ACTION NO. V-01-74

•
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
This is an action under Title I ofthe Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of disability, and to provide appropriate relief to Kerry Williams who was adversely affected by such practices. As alleged with greater particularity in paragraphs 8 through 11 below, Plaintiff, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleges that Defendant, Halliburton Energy Services, discharged Kerry Williams, a qualified individual with a disability, because of her disability.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S. C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337,
1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 107(a) ofthe
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(f)( I) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII"), 42 US.C. §§ 2000e-5(f)(l) and (3), and pursuant to Section 102 ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991,
42 U.S.C. §198la. 2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

r ..

.. '

•

jurisdiction ofthe United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Victoria

Division.

•
PARTIES

3.

Plaintiff, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the 11Commission11),

is the agency of the United States of America charged with the administration, interpretation and

enforcement of Title I of the ADA, and is expressly authorized to bring this action by Section

107(a) ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Sections 706(t)(l)

and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(t)(1) and (3).

4. At all relevant times, Defendant, Halliburton Energy Services, a Delaware

corporation ("Employer"), has continuously been doing business in the State ofTexas and the

County ofVictoria and the City ofVictoria, and has continuously had at least fifteen (15)

employees.

5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer

engaged in an industry affecting commerce under Section 101(5) of the ADA, 42 U.S. C.§

12111(5), and Section 101(7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(7), which incorporates by

reference Sections 70l(g) and (h) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(g) and (h).

6. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has been a covered entity under Section

101(2) ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12111(2).

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

7. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Kerry Williams, filed a

charge with the Commission alleging violations ofTitle I of the ADA by Defendant Employer.

2

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

.. "
•
All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 8. On or about January 25, 1999, Defendant Employer engaged in unlawful
employment practices at their facility located in Victoria, Texas, in violation of Section 102(a) of Title I ofthe ADA, 42 U.S.C §12112(a).
9. Kerry Williams suffers from panic anxiety disorder and depression and, as a result, she is substantially limited in one or more major life activities and has a record of being substantially limited in one or more major life activities. In addition, because of her impairments, Defendant Employer regarded Kerry Williams as substantially limited in one or more major life activities.
10. Kerry Williams is an individual with a disability, as defined by the ADA 11. On or about January 25, 1999, Defendant Employer discharged Kerry Williams from her position as a Senior Administrative Specialist, because she is an individual with a disability, as defined by the ADA 12. The effect ofthe practices complained ofin paragraphs 8 through 11 above has been to deprive Kerry Williams of equal employment opportunities, and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee, because of her disability. 13. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 8 through 11 above were intentional. 14. The unlawful employment practices complained ofin paragraphs 8 through II above were done with malice, or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of
Kerry Williams.
3
ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

,.. ...

... ....

•

15. Interim events have not completely and irrevocably eradicated the effects ofthe unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 8 through 11, and/or the practices are likely to recur.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns, and all persons in active concert or participation with them, from terminating qualified employees with disabilities, because of their disabilities, and any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of disability. B. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for qualified individuals with disabilities, and which eradicate the effects of their past and present unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to posting notices regarding their compliance with the ADA. C. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Kerry Williams by providing appropriate back pay with prejudgment interest, in amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to eradicate the effects ofits unlawful employment practices, including but not limited to reinstatement ofWilliams, or front pay in lieu thereof D. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Kerry Williams by providing compensation for past and future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices described in paragraphs 8 through 11 above, including, but not limited to medical expenses, in amounts to be determined at trial.
4
ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

•

•

... ....~

E. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Kerry Williams by providing

compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices

complained of in paragraphs 8 through 11 above, including, but not limited to, emotional pain,

suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be detennined

at trial.

F. Order Defendant Employer to pay Kerry Williams punitive damages for their

malicious and reckless conduct, as described in paragraphs 8 through 13 above, in amounts to be

determined at triaL

G. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public

interest.

•

H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

Respectfully submitted,

GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS Acting Deputy General Counsel

ROBERT B. HARWIN Regional Attorney D.C. State Bar No. 0760873

LINDA GUTIERREZ Supervisory Trial Attorney Texas State Bar No. 08642750 Southern District No. 14464

0
Trial Attorney and Attorney-in-Charge Texas State Bar No. 00790420 Southern District No. 23969
5

ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

,,

.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
San Antonio District Office 5410 Fredericksburg Rd., Ste. 200 San Antonio, TX 78229-3555 {210) 281-7673 (210) 281-7669 FAX
ATTORNEYSFORPLAJNTWF
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing First Amended Complaint, was served on Defendant Halliburton Energy Services through its attorney W. Carl Jordan, Vinson & Elkins, 2300 First City Tower, 1001 Fannin Street, Houston, Texas 77002-6760 by certified mail, return receipt requested, on this 14th day of August, 2001 .
•
•
M. 0

6
ClibPDF - www.fastio.com

 </s> -USONUiTTEhDff\"i..S[..J.f,T"d4l.·A/l't-~;.,:~r\~::"-~'JUC/FiTPEUXRTASS

FEB
IN TIIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

-

7 2003

FOR TIIE SOurnERN DISTRICT OF TRA£I tv I""~' C

VICTORIA DMSION

. I"•• Y. lerlc of Court

EQUALEMWLOYMENTOPPOR~Y
COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
v.
HAlLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES,
Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. V-01-74

)

)

)

)

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT This Settlement Agreement is made and entered into between Plaintiff, United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC"), and Defendant, Halliburton Energy Services ("HES"), the parties to this agreement. Currently pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Victoria Division, is the lawsuit the EEOC filed on July 9, 2001 against HES styled Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Halliburton Energy Services, identified as Civil Action No. V-01-74 (the "Lawsuit"). The Lawsuit is based on a charge of discrimination filed with the EEOC by former HES employee, Ms. Kerry R. Williams, now deceased ("Decedent"). The EEOC initiated this lawsuit under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, based on Decedent's allegations of unlawful employment practices on the basis of disability. HES denies and continues to deny the allegations of discrimination in EEOC Charge No. 360-991341 and the Lawsuit. The parties agree that there is no "prevailing party" in this action or proceeding. The EEOC and HES, under the terms of this agreement, wish to amicably resolve and settle
EXHIBIT
'-'All

---,-,-----

l(P

all claims and differences between them related to this matter which have been, or could be, in controversy.
IT IS TIIEREFORE AGREED as follows: 1. HES is defined throughout this Settlement Agreement to mean and include Halliburton Energy Services, Halliburton Company and its past, present and future owners, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, divisions, and benefits plans (including trusts), and other related entities, all plans sponsored, maintained or administered by HES, and each of their respective past, present and future shareholders, directors, officers, fiduciaries, employees, agents, insurance carriers, predecessors, successors, assigns, executors, administrators and legal representatives, including but not limited to all persons and entities named or referred to in any part of the Lawsuit or the EEOC charge, in their corporate and individual capacities. 2. This Settlement Agreement resolves all issues and claims raised in EEOC's Complaint in this case, which emanatedfrom a charge of discrimination filed with the EEOC by Decedent, Ms. Kerry R. Williams. EEOC waives further litigation of all issues and claims raised in the above referenced Complaint and Decedent's charge. EEOC expressly reserves its right, however, to process and litigate any other charges which may now be pending or may in the future be filed against HES. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to preclude any party from enforcing this Agreement in the event that any party fails to perform the promises and representations contained herein. 3. Decedent is defined throughout this Agreement to mean and include Kerry R. Williams in any representative capacity (including corporate), and her heirs, executors, administrators, successors, beneficiaries, and assigns.

Settlement Agreement

Page 2

4. Williams is defined throughout this Agreement to mean and include Roy Lee Williams, the surviving spouse and sole heir of the Decedent, acting both in a representative capacity for Decedent, and in an individual capacity, and his heirs, executors, administrators, successors, beneficiaries and assigns. Williams will act on behalf of the Decedent for the purpose of the settlement and release of the Decedent's claims arising from or related to the EEOC charge and lawsuit filed by the EEOC.
5. HES shall pay to Roy Lee Williams, the total sum of $35,000.00 (Thirty Five Thousand Dollars), payable within ten days following the proper execution of a waiver or release of claims by the Administrator of the Estate of Kerry Williams and provided that the EEOC has executed this Settlement Agreement. A copy of the settlement check, and any accompanying transmittal documents shall be forwarded by lIES to Robert B. Harwin, Regional Attorney, San Antonio District Office, United States Equal Employment OpportunityCommission, 5410 FredericksburgRoad, Suite 200, San Antonio, Texas 78229.
6. The terms of this Settlement Agreement shall be binding upon the EEOC and RES, its agents, officers, employees, servants, successors, and assigns, as to the issues resolved herein.
7. The parties to this Settlement Agreement shall bear their own costs and attorney's fees incurred in this action and agree to dismiss this case with prejudice in accordance with the attached

Settlement Agreement

Page 3

Joint Motion for Dismissal of Action.
SO ORDERED this-2-""1:;of /i:t'7zrxg.
N. JOHN D. RA1NEY .S. DISTRICT JUDGE Respectfully Submitted, GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS

~~
Attorney-in-Charge Texas State Bar No. 11018800 Federal I.D. No. 729 SAMANTHA BARLOW MARTINEZ Attorney State Bar No. 24026860 Federal I.D. No. 27604
VINSON & ELKINS 2300 First City Tower 1001 Fannin Street Houston, Texas 77002-6760 Telephone: (713)758-2258 Telecopier: (713)615-5334
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT
Settlement Agreement

egional Attorney D.C tate Bar No. 076083
~I
Supervisory rial Attorney Texas State Bar No. 08642750
J~fNo ~[.D.~O.l~
Trial Attorney & Attorny-in-Charge Texas State Bar No. 00790420 Federal I.D. No. 23969 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION San Antonio District Office 5410 Fredericksburg Rd., Suite 200 San Antonio, Texas 78229-3555 Telephone: (210)281-7638 Telecopier: (210) 281-7669
ATTORNEYSFORPLA~
Page 4

- -------------------

 </s> IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICf COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICf OF TEXAS
VICTORIA DMSION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff,
v.
HAILIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES,
Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

Civil Action No. V-Ol-74

)

)

)

)

AGREED ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This Court has considered the joint motion of Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission and Defendant Halliburton Energy Services to dismiss this action with prejudice. The

Court finds that a Settlement Agreement in this cause has been signed by the parties and that all

claims between the parties have been resolved. The Settlement Agreement, which is attached to the

parties' Joint Motion for Dismissal of Action, is expressly incorporated herein.

It is therefore ORDERED that this case is dismissed with prejudice. It is further ORDERED

that each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys' fees incurred in this action. The Court,

however, retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms and conditions as set forth in the Settlement

Agreement, which is attached to the parties' Joint Motion for Dismissal of Action.
Z Signed on fij,~ 20<]1

ON.JO~~~

.S. DISTRICf JUDGE-

(

 </s> U.S. District Court SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Victoria) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 6:01−cv−00074

CLOSED

EEOC v. Halliburton Energy Assigned to: Judge John D. Rainey Demand: $0 Cause: 42:12188 American Disabilities Act of 1990
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 07/09/2001 Date Terminated: 02/07/2003 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

represented by Cynthia Cano Law Office os Jeffrey A Goldberg 9901 IH−10 West Ste 690 San Antonio, TX 78230 210−690−2200 Fax: 210−690−0438 Email: cmc_goldberglaw@sbcglobal.net LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Linda Gutierrez EEOC 5410 Fredericksburg Rd Ste 200 San Antonio, TX 78229−3555 210−281−7637 Fax: 210−281−7669 fax ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Halliburton Energy Services

represented by W Carl Jordan Vinson &Elkins 1001 Fannin Ste 2500 Houston, TX 77002 713−758−2258 Fax: 713−615−5334 fax Email: cjordan@velaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 07/09/2001 07/09/2001
07/24/2001 07/30/2001

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT by EEOC filed; (fmremp) (Entered: 07/10/2001)
2 Order setting Initial Pretrial and Scheduling Conference on 9:00 10/1/01 before Judge John D. Rainey and Order to Disclose Interested Persons, filed. ( Signed by Judge John D. Rainey ) Parties notified. (fmremp) (Entered: 07/10/2001)
3 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by EEOC , filed. (fmremp) (Entered: 07/24/2001)
4 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Halliburton Energy , filed. (psmith) (Entered: 07/31/2001)

08/08/2001 08/15/2001 09/07/2001 09/21/2001 09/21/2001 09/28/2001 10/01/2001
10/01/2001
07/24/2002 07/31/2002
01/06/2003 02/07/2003 02/07/2003 02/07/2003

5 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed as to Halliburton Energy 7/13/01 Answer due on 9/11/01 for Halliburton Energy , filed. (fmremp) (Entered: 08/08/2001)
6 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT by EEOC , amending [1−1] complaint , filed. (fmremp) (Entered: 08/15/2001)
7 ANSWER to Complaint by Halliburton Energy , filed. (leddins) (Entered: 09/07/2001)
8 JOINT DISCOVERY/Case Management Plan by EEOC, Halliburton Energy , filed. (fmremp) (Entered: 09/21/2001)
9 AMENDED CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Halliburton Energy , filed. (fmremp) (Entered: 09/21/2001)
10 ADVISORY TO THE COURT by EEOC , filed (fmremp) (Entered: 09/28/2001)
11 CONFERENCE MEMORANDUM; Rule 16 conference held by telephone before Judge John D. Rainey; Scheduling Order was signed; entered. Parties ntfd. ( signed by Judge John D. Rainey ) (fmremp) (Entered: 10/01/2001)
12 SCHEDULING ORDER setting Pltf expert witness list submitted by 3/29/02 ; Deft expert witness list submitted by 5/10/02 ; Discovery cutoff 10/1/02 ; Deadline for filing all dispositive motions 10/14/02 ; Deadline for filing non−dispositive motions 10/14/02 ; Pretrial order to be submitted on or before 12/30/02 ; Jury Trial deadline 9:30 1/1/03 ETT: 3 days, entered. Parties notified. Trial Term: January 2003 ( Signed by Judge John D. Rainey ) (fmremp) (Entered: 10/01/2001)
13 JOINT MOTION to stay proceedings pending final settlement by parties , filed (lmunoz) (Entered: 07/24/2002)
14 ORDER granting [13−1] joint motion to stay proceedings pending final settlement final settlement documents to be submitted by 1/6/03 further, the scheduling order entered in this case on 10/01/01 is hereby stayed , entered; Parties notified. ( signed by Judge John D. Rainey ) (lmunoz) (Entered: 07/31/2002)
15 JOINT MOTION for dismissal of action by EEOC, Halliburton Energy , filed (lmunoz) (Entered: 01/06/2003)
16 ORDER SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, entered; Parties notified. ( signed by Judge John D. Rainey ) (lmunoz) (Entered: 02/07/2003)
17 AGREED ORDER OF DISMISSAL with prejudice, entered; Parties notified. ( signed by Judge John D. Rainey ) (lmunoz) (Entered: 02/07/2003)
Case closed (lmunoz) (Entered: 02/07/2003)


[CONTENT] EEOC | Halliburton Energy Services | the United States | District Court | the Southern District | Texas | July 2001 ||| Defendant | Americans ||| ADA ||| July 2002 | February 2003 ||| Halliburton Energy Services | 35,000 [SUMMARY] The San Antonio Field Office of the EEOC brought this suit against Halliburton Energy Services in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas in July 2001. The complaint alleged that the Defendant violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by terminating the complainant, who suffered from panic anxiety disorder and depression. The complainant was disabled under the ADA,  had a record of a disability, and was regarded by her employer as disabled. The parties made a joint motion to stay proceedings in July 2002 pending a final settlement, which was reached in February 2003. According to the settlement agreement, Halliburton Energy Services agreed to pay $35,000 to the deceased complainant's husband to resolve the suit.

