Case 2:05-cv-00955-AJS Document 1-1 Filed 07/13/2005 Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff,

CIVIL ACTION NO0 5

TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. Defendant.

COMPLAINT JURY TRIAL DEMAND

NATURE OF THE ACTION This is an action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex and to provide appropriate relief to Valerie Dowds who was adversely affected by such practices. As alleged with greater particularity in paragraphs 7 and 8 below, the Commission alleges that Ms. Dowds was subjected to unwelcome sexual harassment which was created by the conduct of a male supervisor. Despite Ms. Dowds’ rejection of the advances and complaints to company owners, the unwanted actions continued. Ultimately, Defendant discharged Ms. Dowds in retaliation for having asserted her rights under the law. As a result of the sexually hostile work environment, and retaliatory discharge, Ms. Dowds suffered severe emotional distress as well as backpay losses.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 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 706(0(1) and (3) of Title VII

Case 2:05-cv-00955-AJS Document 1-1 Filed 07/13/2005 Page 2 of 6
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) ("Title VII"). This action is also authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 102 of Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a..
2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
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 VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1)and (3). 4. At all relevant times, Defendant Tom Lange Company, Inc. (the "Employer"), has been a Missouri corporation with headquarters in Springfield, Illinois. Defendant’s western Pennsylvania office is located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and has continuously had at least 15 employees. 5. At all relevant times, Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 701(b), (g) and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e(b), (g) and (h).
STATEMENT OF CLAIMS 6. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Valerie Dowds filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Commission alleging violations of Title VII by Defendant Employer. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled. 7. Since at least January 1, 1997, Defendant Employer has engaged in unlawful employment practices at its Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania location, in violation of 703(a)(1) of Title VII,

Case 2:05-cv-00955-AJS Document 1-1 Filed 07/13/2005 Page 3 of 6

42 U.S.C. Section 2000e-2(a)(1). These unlawful practices include, but are not limited to, the

following:

a. Defendant’s Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania location is headed by Tom Law, Vice President

of Sales for the Pittsburgh Division.

bo

Valerie Dowds started working for Defendant in 1997 as a secretary or assistant to

Mr. Law.

C. Starting in March, 1998, Mr. Law subjected Ms. Dowds to sexual harassment in

form of unwanted touching and language. After she complained to Defendant’s CEO, Phillip

Gumpert, the harassment ceased.

d. However, in 2000, Mr. Law’s unwanted conduct recommenced and continued until

May 12, 2004, when Defendant terminated Ms. Dowds’ employment.

e. During that time, among other things, Mr. Law asked Ms. Dowds, a married woman,

to have sex with him; he continually made crude sexual comments or "jokes;" he subjected her to

unwanted back rubs; he repeatedly hugged her so as to touch her breasts; he made lewd sexual noises

in her presence; he tried to look down her blouse; he put her in a head lock and knuckled the top of

her head.

f. Ms. Dowds repeatedly told Mr. Law to stop the sexual harassment and advised that

she was not interested in a sexual relationship with him.

g. Defendant Employer did not have a written harassment policy during the relevant time

period.

8. Since at least March 22, 2004, Defendant Employer has engaged in unlawful

employment practices at its Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania location, in violation of 704(a)(1) of Title VII,

Case 2:05-cv-00955-AJS Document 1-1 Filed 07/13/2005 Page 4 of 6
U.S.C. Section 2000e-3(a). These unlawful practices include, but are not limited to, the following: a. On or around March 22, 2004, Ms. Dowds again complained to Mr. Gumpert of the
unwanted harassment. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Gumpert met with Mr. Law and they issued an e-mail message to all employees relating to the issue of harassment.
b. By letter dated April 22, 2004, Mr. Gumpert informed Ms. Dowds that his investigation did not reveal "any violation of legal standards, but that he alerted Mr. Law of her concerns and the need to maintain a professional and ’legally appropriate work environment.’" Mr. Gumpert concluded the letter by informing Ms. Dowds that she could call him with concerns any time, "24 hours a day, seven days a week."
c. Thereafter, Mr. Law unduly harassed Ms. Dowds about coming in to work "a few minutes late," while he did not reprimand male employees who engaged in the same alleged infraction.
d. On May 18, 2004, after 18 years of exemplary employment, Defendant stated that it fired Ms. Dowds for alleged "insubordination" and "failure to follow company policy."
e. The Commission alleges that Defendant fired Ms. Dowds in retaliation for her complaints of sexual harassment.
9. The effect of the practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above has been to deprive Ms. Dowds of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee, because of her sex.
10. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 through 8 above were intentional.
11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were
4

Case 2:05-cv-00955-AJS Document 1-1 Filed 07/13/2005 Page 5 of 6
11. The unlawful employment practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Ms. Dowds.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, the Commission requests that this Court: A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in the creation and/or maintenance of a sexually hostile work environment and retaliating against employees who complain of such and in any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of sex. B. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from discriminating within any of its establishments between employees on the basis of sex. C. Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for women, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices. D. Order Defendant Employer to make whole Valerie Dowds by providing compensation for past and future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial. E. Order Defendant Employer to pay Valerie Dowds punitive damages for its malicious and/or reckless conduct described in paragraphs 7 and 8 above, in an amount to be determined at trial.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-AJS Document 1-1 Filed 07/13/2005 Page 6 of 6

F. Order Defendant Employer to pay Valerie Dowds past and future economic losses,

including loss of wages, bonuses, and all benefits she would have received but for the illegal and

retaliatory discharge.

Go

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

interest.

H. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

JURY TRIAL DEMAND The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its Complaint.

ERIC S. DREIBAND GENERAL COUNSEL
JAMES L. LEE DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS ASSOCIATE GENERAL COUNSEL
°’JACQIJELINE H. MCNAIR REGIONAL ATTORNEY

SUPERVISORY TRI.AL ATTORNEY
M. ~F~N ~LICKNER ’ SENIOR--’TRIAL ATTORNEY
Pa. I.D. No. 42738
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Pittsburgh Area Office Liberty Center, Suite 300 1001 Liberty Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15222 (412) 644-6439 (412) 644-4935 (facsimile)

 </s> Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 1 of 21

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

VALERIE DOWDS

: CIVIL ACTION NO: 05 0955

Plaintiff,

v.

TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. TOM LAW; PHILLIP GUMPERT.

:COMPLAINT

Defendants.

: Filed on behalf of Plaintiff:

: Counsel of record for this party:

: FRANCIS M. MOORE, ESQUIRE : PA I.D. #60039

: MANSMANN & MOORE

: 220 Grant Street - 7th Floor : Pittsburgh, PA 15219

: TELE:

412-232-0661

: FPLX:

412-232-0233

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 2 of 21

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

VALERIE DOWDS

: CIVIL ACTION NO: 05 0955

Plaintiff,

v.

TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. TOM LAW; PHILLIP GUMPERT

Defendants.

JURISDICTION

Jurisdiction ofthis court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331, 1337 and 1343.

This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to pursuant to Section 706(f)(l) and (3)

of Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(l) and

(3) ("Title VII"). This action is also authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 102 of

Title I ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1991,42 U.S.C. § 1981(a). Plaintiff is authorized to

intervene in the action brought by the EEOC pursuant to section 706(f)(l) of Title VII, 42

U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(l). Further, this court has pendant jurisdiction to hear and decide

claims under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1367.

VENUE

The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the

Jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 3 of 21
CIVIL COMPLAINT AND NOW COMES the plaintiff, Valerie Dowds, by and through her attorneys, Francis M. Moore, Esquire and MANSMANN-MOORE, and files this Complaint, whereof the following is a statement:
PARTIES 1. Plaintiff, Valerie Dowds, an adult individual with a place of residence of 7097 Bennington Wood Drive, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15237. 2. Defendant, Tom Lange Company, Inc. (the "Employer"), is a Missouri corporation, with headquarters in Illinois. It has a place of business located at 1000 Gamma Drive, Suite 604, Pittsburgh, PA 15238. Defendant's office in Pittsburgh had at least fifteen employees and at all times relevant hereto and Defendant Employer has continuously been an employer in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 70l(b), (g) and (h) ofTitle VII, 42 U.S.C. §§2000e(b), (g), and (h). 3. Defendant, Tom Law, Vice President of Sales for the Pittsburgh Division of Defendant Employer, with a place of business located at 1000 Gamma Drive, Suite 604, Pittsburgh, PA 15238. 4. Defendant Phillip Gumpert, CEO of Defendant Employer, with a place of business located at 1000 Gamma Drive, Suite 604, Pittsburgh, PA 15238.
STATEMENT OF FACTS 5. Valerie Dowds began working for the Tom Lange Company, Inc., in 1987. Mrs. Dowds was employed as a secretary or as an assistant to Tom Law, her supervisor.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 4 of 21
6. Starting in February 1998, Tom Law began subjecting Mrs. Dowds to sexual harassment, in the form of unwanted touching and language
7. Mrs. Dowds complained about this unwanted harassment to Tom Law's supervisor, the CEO of employer, Phillip Gumpert.
8. As a result of that complaint, Tom Law, temporarily refrained from engaging in offensive conduct towards Mrs. Dowds.
9. In 2002, Tom Law resumed sexually harassing Mrs. Dowds. This harassment continued until Mrs. Dowds employment was terminated on May 12,2004.
10. During this period, Tom Law harassed Ms. Dowds in the following ways: a) He repeatedly asked Mrs. Dowds, a married woman, to have sex with him;
b) He repeatedly directed inappropriate comments at Mrs. Dowds; c) He repeatedly made derogatory jokes about Mrs. Dowds related to her
sex;
d) He repeatedly subjected Mrs. Dowds to unwanted backrubs. He accomplished this by sneaking up behind her while she was sitting and placing his hands on her back and attempting to massage her;
e) He repeatedly restrained Mrs. Dowds movements, by placing her in headlocks, and holding her in her chair while he attempted to massage her back;
f) He repeatedly rubbed Mrs. Dowds scalp with his knuckles while he confined her in a headlock;
g) He repeatedly made lewd sexual noises in her presences; h) He repeatedly tried to look down her blouse;
i) He repeatedly hugged Mrs. Dowds and placed his hands across her breasts;
j) He repeatedly knocked Mrs. Dowds over when she was in his office looking for files.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 5 of 21
11. Mrs. Dowds rebuffed all sexual advances made by Tom Law, told him this conduct was unwelcome, that she was uninterested and asked him to stop.
12. On or around March 22, 2004, Mrs. Dowds complained to Phillip Gumpert about being sexually harassed by Tom Law. Shortly thereafter, and in response thereto, Phillip Gumpert met with Tom Law. Together, they issued an email relating to the issue of workplace harassment.
13. In a letter dated April 22, 2004, Phillip Gumpert informed Mrs. Dowds that his investigation did not reveal any legal wrongdoing. Mr. Gumpert further stated that he alerted Mr. Law of the need to maintain a professional and legally appropriate work environment and notified him of Plaintiffs concerns. Phillip Gumpert also stated that Mrs. Dowds could call him with her concerns at any time, twenty four hours a day, seven days a week.
14. Thereafter, Mrs. Dowds was singled out and disciplined by Tom Law for arriving at work several minutes late. Significantly, male employees were not reprimanded for the same conduct.
15. On May 18, 2004, after eighteen years of employment, Tom Law, with the blessing and approval of Phillip Gumpert, terminated Plaintiff for "insubordination" and "failure to follow company policy."
Count I Valerie Dowds v. Tom Lange Company, Inc.
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-3: Unlawful Dismissal 16. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 6 of 21
17. On or around March 22, 2004, Plaintiff engaged in protected activity, by complaining to Defendant, Phillip Gumpert of workplace sexual harassment.
18. As a result of this complaint, Defendant Phillip Gumpert, met with Defendant, Tom Law and issued an email to all employees concerning harassment.
19. Thereafter, Plaintiff was unduly harassed for arriving at work several minutes late, though similarly situated males were not reprimanded for the same infraction.
20. On April 22, 2004, Defendant Phillip Gumpert informed Plaintiff that his investigation did not reveal any illegal conduct, though he told her to contact him at any time with any concerns.
21. Thereafter, Defendant's took adverse employment action against Plaintiff, by terminating her employment, in retaliation for complaining of sexual harassment.
22. The effect of the complained of practices has been to deny Plaintiff of equal employment opportunities and to otherwise adversely affect her status as an employee, because of her sex.
23. The unlawful employment practices, complained of above, were intentional. Indeed, Defendant dismissed Plaintiff within two months of making an internal complaint.
24. The unlawful employment practices complained of herein were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court:

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 7 of 21
a) Order Defendant Employer to pay Plaintiff past and future economics losses, including loss of wages, bonuses, and all benefits she would have received but for the illegal discharge.
b) Order Defendant Employer to make Plaintiff whole by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.
c) Order Defendant Employer to pay Plaintiff punitive damages for its malicious an/or reckless conduct as described above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
d) Award Plaintiff costs and reasonable Attorneys Fees. e) Grant a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer, its
officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in the creation and/or maintenance of a sexually hostile work environment and retaliating against employees who complain of such and in any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of sex. f) Grant a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from discriminating within any of its establishments on the basis of sex.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 8 of 21
g) Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for women, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.
h) Grant such other further relief as this Court deems necessary and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Count II Valerie Dowds v. Tom Lange Company 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2: Employment Discrimination Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment
25. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
26. Defendant Employer discriminated against Plaintiff because of her sex, so as to alter the terms and conditions of her employment, by requiring her to work in a discriminatory, hostile and abusive environment.
27. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Employer was aware that Plaintiff was subject to blatantly sexist behavior in the workplace, such as requests for sexual favors, back massages and involuntary touching, as well as those other incidents set forth in more detail above.
28. This discrimination, which took place over a period of months and years, was pervasive, regular and severe. Further, Defendant Tom Law structured Plaintiffs

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 9 of 21
assignments so as to get time alone with her, after Defendant Employer was made aware that Plaintiff was being sexually harassed by Defendant, Tom Law.
29. This discrimination detrimentally affected the plaintiff in the following ways:
a) It impaired Plaintiffs ability to perform her job effectively during normal working hours, requiring her to work significant overtime;
b) Defendant, Tom Law's conduct, towards Plaintiff, caused her Embarrassment;
c) Defendant, Tom Law, told other employees that Plaintiff couldn't keep her hands offhim, affecting the view other employees held of Plaintiff;
d) Defendant's conduct caused Plaintiff to feel miserable; e) Plaintiff perceived herself to be subject to an abusive environment as
manifested through her supervisor's interactions with her. 30. The complained of discrimination, being severe and pervasive, was such that it would have detrimentally affected a reasonable person of the same sex in Plaintiffs position. Accordingly, a reasonable person would find this work environment hostile or abusive. 31. Defendant Employer was first notified that Plaintiff was subject to sexual harassment in March, 1998. At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff was harassed by Employers agent, Vice President Tom Law, a management level employee who was Plaintiffs supervisor. 32. This conduct constituted an illegal and discriminatory condition of employment that poisoned Plaintiffs work environment and erected barriers to her full

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 10 of 21
participation in the work force, of the sort that Congress intended to sweep away by the enactment of Title VII.
33. The unlawful employment practices complained of herein were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court:
a) Order Defendant Employer to pay Plaintiff past and future economics losses, including loss of wages, bonuses, and all benefits she would have received but for the illegal discharge.
b) Order Defendant Employer to make Plaintiff whole by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.
c) Order Defendant Employer to pay Plaintiff punitive damages for its malicious an/or reckless conduct as described above, in amounts to be determined at trial.
d) Award Plaintiff costs and reasonable Attorneys Fees. e) Grant a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer, its
officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from engaging in the creation and/or maintenance of a sexually hostile work environment and retaliating against employees who complain of such and in any other employment practice which discriminates on the basis of sex.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 11 of 21
f) Grant a permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant Employer, its officers, successors, assigns and all persons in active concert or participation with it, from discriminating within any of its establishments on the basis of sex.
g) Order Defendant Employer to institute and carry out policies, practices and programs which provide equal employment opportunities for women, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful employment practices.
h) Grant such other further relief as this Court deems necessary and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Count III Valerie Dowds v. Tom Lange Company, Inc.
43 P.S. § 955 (2004): Unlawful Discriminatory Practices under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act
34. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
35. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Employer was aware that Plaintiff was subject to blatantly sexist behavior in the workplace, such as requests for sexual favors, back massages and involuntary touching, as well as those other incidents set forth in more detail above.
36. Accordingly, Defendant Employer discriminated against Plaintiff because of her sex, so as to alter the terms and conditions of her employment, by requiring her to work in a discriminatory, hostile and abusive environment.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 12 of 21
37. This discrimination, which took place over a period of months and years, was pervasive, regular and severe. Further, Defendant Tom Law structured Plaintiffs assignments so as to get time alone with her, after Defendant Employer was made aware that Plaintiff was being sexually harassed by Defendant, Tom Law.
38. On or around March 22, 2004, Plaintiff engaged in protected activity, by complaining to Defendant, Phillip Gumpert of workplace sexual harassment.
39. As a result of engaging in Protected Activity, and in retaliation therefore, Plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action and was terminated from her job.
40. This discrimination detrimentally affected the plaintiff in the following ways:
a) It impaired Plaintiffs ability to perform her job effectively during normal working hours, requiring her to work significant overtime;
b) Defendant, Tom Law's conduct, towards Plaintiff, caused her embarrassment and humiliation;
c) Defendant, Tom Law, told other employees that Plaintiff couldn't keep her hands off him, affecting the view other employees held of Plaintiff;
d) Defendant's conduct caused Plaintiff to feel miserable; e) Plaintiff perceived herself to be subject to an abusive environment as
manifested through her supervisor's interactions with her. f) Plaintiff was terminated from her employment, with the resulting loss
of economic benefits. 41. The complained of discrimination, being severe and pervasive, was such that it would have detrimentally affected a reasonable person of the same sex in

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 13 of 21
Plaintiffs position. Accordingly, a reasonable person would find this work environment hostile or abusive.
42. This conduct constituted an illegal and discriminatory condition of employment that poisoned Plaintiffs work environment and erected barriers to her full participation in the work force, of the sort that the State intended to sweep away by enacting the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.
43. The unlawful employment practices complained of herein were done with malice or with reckless indifference to the rights protected by the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court: a) Order Defendant Employer to pay Plaintiff past and future economics losses, including loss of wages, bonuses, and all benefits she would have received but for the illegal discharge. b) Order Defendant Employer to make Plaintiff whole by providing compensation for past and future non-pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of, including emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, loss of enjoyment of life, and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial. c) Order Defendant Employer to pay Plaintiff punitive damages for its malicious an/or reckless conduct as described above, in amounts to be determined at trial. d) Award Plaintiff reasonable Attorneys Fees. e) Award Plaintiff reasonable costs.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 14 of 21
f) Award Plaintiff such other relief as this Court may find just or proper. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Count IV Valerie Dowds v. Tom Lange Company, Inc.
Negligent Retention 44. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein. 45. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Tom Law was a servant of Defendant Employer. 46. Defendant Employer had been informed in 1998 that Defendant Tom Law, was sexually harassing Plaintiff. 47. Defendant Tom Law, resumed harassing Plaintiff in 2002, on the premises of Defendant Employer, while in the scope of his employ as Plaintiffs immediate supervisor. 48. Defendant Employer was aware of the severity of this conduct by its agent, but failed to exercise ordinary care to prevent such harm. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands that the court:
a) Award Plaintiff compensatory damages against defendant. b) Award Plaintiff punitive damages against defendant. c) Such other and further relief as is just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 15 of 21
CountV Valerie Dowds v. Tom Lange Company, Inc.
Vicarious Liability: Respondeat Superior 49. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein. 50. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant Tom Law was a servant of Defendant Employer. 51. All torts committed by Defendant Tom Law against Plaintiff, complained of in this complaint, were committed in the scope of Defendant's employment, as Plaintiffs supervisor. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands that the court:
a) Award Plaintiff compensatory damages against defendant. b) Award Plaintiff punitive damages against defendant. c) Such other and further relief as is just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Count VI Valerie Dowds v. Tom Law False Arrest and Imprisonment and PA. Const. art. l, § 8 52. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein. 53. At various times during the course of her employ, Defendant Tom Law acted with the intention of confining Plaintiff, Valerie Dowds within fixed boundaries, an

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 16 of 21
action proscribed by the Constitution of Pennsylvania, article 1, §8, and the Restatement (Second) of Torts §35 (1965). Defendant Tom Law engaged in this conduct by:
a) Placing Plaintiff in a headlock on several occasions; b) Grabbing Plaintiff from behind, while she was seated, forcibly
confining Plaintiff in her seat, while Defendant attempted to give her a massage or hug her so as to touch her breasts. 54. Defendant's acts were the direct cause of Plaintiffs confinement. 55. At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff, Valerie Dowds was conscious that she was being confined against her will by Defendant, Tom Law. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands that the court: a) Award the Plaintiff compensatory damages against defendants
jointly and severally. b) Award the individually named plaintiff punitive damages against
defendants jointly and severally. c) Such other and further relief as is just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Count VII Valerie Dowds v. Tom Law
Battery 56. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein. 57. During the course of her employment, Defendant Tom Law acted in a willful manner to cause harmful or offensive contact to Plaintiff. Such conduct included:

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 17 of 21
a) Subjecting Plaintiff to unwanted back rubs; b) Repeatedly hugging Plaintiff so as to touch her breasts; c) Placing Plaintiff in a headlock; d) Running his knuckles along the top of her head; e) Driving his knees into her side when Plaintiff was filing in his office. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands that the court: a) Award the Plaintiff compensatory damages against defendants
jointly and severally. b) Award the individually named plaintiff punitive damages against
defendants jointly and severally. c) Such other and further relief as is just and proper.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COUNT VIII Valerie Dowds v. Tom Law Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 58. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein. 59. In purposefully creating a hostile work environment, engaging in sexual harassment and inappropriate touching, Defendant acted in an extreme and outrageous manner, beyond the bounds of all decency, conduct proscribed by the Restatement (Second) ofTorts §46 (1965).

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 18 of 21
60. The Defendant's knew or should have known that such unwarranted, unwelcome and offensive conduct would cause the Plaintiff severe emotional distress, embarrassment and humiliation.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands that the court: a) Award the Plaintiff compensatory damages against defendants jointly and severally. b) Award the individually named plaintiff punitive damages against defendants jointly and severally. c) Such other and further relief as is just and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COUNT IX Valerie Dowds v. Tom Law Slander
61. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
62. Defendant, Tom Law made defamatory statements to Nova Rizzo and Chris, that Plaintiff, a married women, could not keep her hands off of him, an action implying great moral turpitude.
63. Defendant, Tom Law, made these statements out of malice, as a jilted, rejected love interest.
64. The recipients of these statements, understood them to mean that Plaintiff, a married woman, was unfaithful to her husband, and hence of loose morals.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 19 of 21
65. As a result of these communications, Plaintiffs reputation was damaged among her coworkers and her reputation suffered in that community.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands that the court: a) Award the Plaintiff compensatory damages against defendants jointly and severally. b) Award the individually named plaintiff punitive damages against defendants jointly and severally. c) Such other and further relief as is just and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED COUNT X Valerie Dowds v. Tom Law Slander
66. All previous paragraphs are incorporated by reference as if the same were set forth more fully at length herein.
67. On May 12, 2004, Defendant Tom Law, made defamatory statements about Plaintiff, after she had been dismissed, in the presence of her former coworkers.
68. Defendant Tom Law instructed Plaintiffs former coworkers to "watch Val as she packs up her stuff. Make sure she doesn't take anything that belongs in the office." Further, Defendant Tom Law watched Plaintiff and paced behind her desk as she gathered her personal effects.
69. The statements and actions of Defendant, Tom Law, amounted to an assertion that Plaintiff was dishonest, and would steal if not constantly watched.

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 20 of 21

70. Defendant, Tom Law, made these statements out of malice, as a jilted, rejected love interest.
71. The recipients of this statement understood them to mean that Plaintiff could not be trusted, was dishonest, and either would steal, or had stolen, causing her to be dismissed.
72. As a result of these communications, Plaintiffs reputation was impaired among her former coworkers and her reputation suffered in that community.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands that the court: a) Award Plaintiff compensatory damages against defendant. b) Award Plaintiff punitive damages against defendant. c) Such other and further relief as is just and proper. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

////_///'/-/-;./,7/';//-/

/
.· /

/

./ /<

' i

//' (/'/·~/

"-v"-"" /Pt:'/. I

/F;anci;·M. Mo:re;sq,

PA I.D. #60039

MANSMANN & MOORE

220 Grant Street

Pittsburgh, PA 15219

(412) 232-0661

Case 2:05-cv-00955-TFM Document 3-2 Filed 07/26/2005 Page 21 of 21
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Counsel for Plaintiff-Intervenor does hereby certify that on the 25th day of July, 2005, I mailed a true and correct copy of the within pleading, via First Class mail, postage prepaid, to the below named party of interest:
M. Jean Clickner, Trial Attorney US. EEOC
Liberty Center 1001 Liberty Avenue, Suite 300
Pittsburgh, PA 15222-4187 Gregory A. Miller
(Counsel for Tom Law, Tom Lange Co., & Phil Gumpert) Buchanan Ingersoll, P.C. One Oxford Centre
20th Floor, 301 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Fra IS M. Moore, Esquire Counsel for Plaintiff-Intervenor

 </s> IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,
Plaintiff, v.
TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. Defendant.

) ) ) CNIL ACTION NO. 05-0955 ) ) ) ) McVERRY, J. ) ) )

CONSENT DECREE INTRODUCTION
A. This action was instituted by the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (lithe EEOC" or lithe Commission") on July 13, 2005, against Tom Lange Company, Inc. ("Defendant") to enforce provisions of Title VITof the Civil Rights of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. ("Title VIT").The EEOC alleged that Defendant subjected Valerie Dowds to harassment based on her sex and discharged her on or about May 18, 2004 in retaliation for having exercised her rights under Title VITwhen she complained about ongoing sexual harassment.
B. This Consent Decree is entered into by the EEOC and Defendant. This Consent Decree shall be final and binding between the EEOC and Defendant, its directors, officers, successors or assigns (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Defendant").
C. The EEOC and Defendant do hereby agreeto the entryofthis ConsentDecree,which shall fully and finally resolve all claims which were raised by the EEOC in its Complaint in Civil
1

Action No. 05-0955, and the case shall be dismissed with prejudice. This Consent Decree shall not constitute an adjudication of or finding on the merits of the case and shall not be construed as an admission by Defendant of any violation of Title VII.
DECREE Upon consent of the parties to this action, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that:
NON-DISCRIMINATION AND NON-RETALIATION 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter ofthis action. 2. Defendant is enjoined from engaging in any employment practice which constitutes unlawful discrimination under Title VII. Specifically,Defendantis enjoinedfrom creating,fostering or tolerating a hostile work environment based on sex. 3. Defendant is enjoined from engagingin any employmentpractices which retaliatein any manner against anyperson, including but not limited to Valerie Dowds, because of that person's opposition to any practice alleged or believed to be unlawful under Title VII, or because ofthe filing of a charge, the giving of testimony or assistance, or the participation in any manner in any investigation, hearing or proceeding under Title VII. 4. Defendant shall not divulge, directly or indirectly, to any employer or potential employer of Valerie Dowds, any ofthe facts or circumstancesrelated to the charge of discrimination against Defendant, or any ofthe events relating to Ms. Dowds' participation in the litigation ofthis matter. 5. Defendant shall comply fully with all provisionsof Title VII. Nothing in this Consent Decree, either by inclusion or exclusion, shall be construed to limit the obligations of Defendant
2

under Title vn or the EEOC's authority to process or litigateanychargeof discriminationwhichmay be filed against it in the future.
MONETARY RELIEF 6. Defendant agrees to pay total monetary relief in the amount of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($150,000.00), in full settlement of the claims against Defendant raised in the EEOC's Complaint. The check for Twenty-five ThousandDollars($25,000.00),less all lawful deductions, in back wages and a check in the amount of Seventy-five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00) in compensatory damages shall be paid to Valerie Dowds, in full settlement of the claims against Defendant which were raised in the EEOC's complaint. As required by law, Defendant will issue to Ms. Dowds an IRS Form W-2 for the wage loss and an IRS Form 1099 reflecting the compensatory damage payment to Ms. Dowds. In addition, Defendant will issue a check in the amount of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00),made payable to Mansmann & Moore, as attorneys' fees and will issue an IRS Form 1099 to Mansmann & Moore and to Ms. Dowds. In order to receive the monetary relief, Ms. Dowds must execute a Settlement Agreement and Release that is mutually agreeable to herself and Defendant. Within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of the Release, Defendant will mail the aforementionedchecks for monetaryreliefto Ms. Dowds,7097 Bennington Wood Drive, Pittsburgh, PA 15237, and to Mansmann & Moore, 220 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15219.Defendant will mail a photocopy ofthe checks to the EEOC, to the attention ofM. Jean Clickner, Senior Trial Attorney, EEOC, 1001 Liberty Avenue, Suite 300, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222, within five days of the date of mailing of the checks.
3

POSTING OF NOTICE

7. Within ten (10) business days after entry ofthis Decree, Defendant shallpost a same-

sized copies ofthe Notice attached as Exhibit 1 to this Decree on the bulletin board usually used at

its Pittsburgh location for communicatingwith employees. The Notice shall remain posted forthree

(3) years from the date of entry of this Decree. Counsel for Defendant shall provide a copy of the

Notice, and an indication of the date and location of its posting, to the EEGC's Pittsburgh Area

Office, attention: M. Jean Clickner, Senior Trial Attorney, within ten (10) days of the posting.

Defendant shall permit a representative ofthe EEOC to enter it's premises for purposes of verifying

compliance with this Paragraph at any time during normal business hours without prior notice.

Defendant shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the posting is not altered, defaced or covered

by any other material. Should the posted copies become defaced, removed, marred, or otherwise

illegible, Defendant agrees to immediately post a readable copy in the same manner as heretofore

specified. 8.

RECORD KEEPING For a period of three (3) years following entry of this Decree, Defendant shall

maintain and make available for inspection and copyingby the EEOC records of each complaint of

any incident of sexual harassment occurring at its Pittsburgh location. Each such report shall

indicate the date the complaint of sexual harassment was made, who made it, what was alleged, and what actions the Defendant took to resolve the matter. The Defendant shall also make records of all

actions it takes to prevent sexual harassment at its Pittsburgh facility for the duration of this Decree. 9. Defendant shall make all documents or records referred to in Paragraph 8, above,

available for inspection and copying within ten (10) business days after the EEOC so requests. In

4

addition, Defendant shall make available for interview all persons within its employ who the EEOC reasonably requests for purposes of verifying compliance with this Decree and shall permit a

representative ofthe EEOC to enter Defendants premises for suchpurposes on five (5)businessdays

advance notice by the EEOC.

10. Nothing contained in this Decree shall be construedto limit anyobligationDefendant

may otherwise have to maintain records under Title VITor any other law or regulation.

TRAINING

11. terms:

Defendant shall provide training on the requirements of Title VITon the following

(a) For a period of two years, Defendant agrees to provide annual training sessions to all of its employees (including all of its Managers or Supervisors) at its Pittsburgh facility, and to an employee and/or supervisor performing the Human Resources functions, by a trainer, person, or

vendor, qualified to provide training on an employee's rights and the employer's obligations under

Title VIT. This training will emphasize what constitutes unlawfulharassmentin theworkplace,how to keep the company free of any such form of discrimination, and what constitutes unlawful retaliation.

(b) In the event an employee is hired after the date of the required training session to be held in 2005 and 2006, Defendant agrees to show a videotape of the required training as part ofthe new employee orientation. Records ofthe new employee orientation will be maintained and will be

made available to EEOC for inspection and copyingat the EEOC's request. A registryof attendance at all training sessions shall be retained by Defendant for the duration of the Consent Decree.
(c) Defendant shall first provide training in accordance with Paragraph 11(a) by no later

5

than ninety (90) calendar days of the entry of this Consent Decree. Defendant shallthen alsoprovide such training on at least one occasion in calendar year 2006.
12. Defendant shall notify the EEOC of its proposed trainer prior to each year's training sessions. Defendant shall submit the name, address, telephone number and resume ofthe proposed trainer, together with the date(s) of the proposed training sessions to the EEOC within thirty (30) calendar days prior to the first day ofthe proposed date(s) of training. The EEOC shall have ten (10) calendar days from the date of receipt of the information described above to accept or reject the proposed trainer(s) and approval of the proposed trainer will not be unreasonably denied. In the event, however, that the EEOC does not approve Defendant's designated trainer(s), Defendant shall have ten (10) calendar days to identify an alternate trainer. The EEOC shall have ten (10) calendar days from the date of receipt of the information described above to accept or reject the alternate trainer. In the event the EEOC does not approve Defendant's alternate trainer, the EEOC shall designate the trainer to be retained and paid for by Defendant.
13. Defendant agrees to provide the EEOC with a copy of any and all pamphlets, brochures, outlines or other written materials provided to the participants of the training sessions.
-14. Defendant shall certify to the EEOC in writing with five (5) business days after the training sessions required by Paragraphs 11 and 12 above have occurred that the training has taken place and that the required personnel have attended. Such certification shall include: (i) the dates, location and duration of the training session; (ii) a copy of the registry of attendance, which shall include the name and position of each person in attendance; and (iii) a listing of all current employees, in the Pittsburgh office, including temporary employees, as of the date of the training.
6

DISPUTE RESOLUTION 15. In the event that either party to this Decree believes that the other party has failed to comply with any provision(s) of the Decree, the complainingparty shall notify the other party ofthe alleged non-compliance within ten (10) days of the alleged non-compliance and shall afford the alleged non-complying party ten (10) business days to remedy the non-compliance or to satisfy the complaining party that the alleged non-complyingparty has complied. Ifthe allegednon-complying party has not remedied the alleged non-compliance or satisfied the complaining party that it has complied within ten (10) business days, the complainingpartymay applyto the Court for appropriate relief.
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 16. Each party to this Decree shall bear its own expenses, costs and attorneys' fees. 17. The terms of this Decree are and shall be binding upon the present and future representatives, agents, directors, officers, assigns, and successorsof Defendantin their capacitiesas representatives, agents, directors and officers of Tom Lange Company, Inc., and not in their individual capacities. This paragraph shall not be construed as placing any limit on remedies available to the Court in the event that any individual is found to be in contempt for a violation of this Decree. 18. This Consent Decree shall fully and finally resolve all claims which were raised by the EEOC in its Complaint in Civil Action No. 05-0955. 19. This Consent Decree shall be filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania and shall continue to be in effect for a period of three (3) years. Any application by any party to modify or vacate this Consent Decree during such period shall be made
7

by motion to the Court on no less than thirty (30) days notice to the other party. 20. The Court retains jurisdiction over this case in order to enforce the terms of the
Consent Decree. 21. The Clerk ofthe District Court is hereby directed to send a file-stamped copy ofthis
Consent Decree to counsel of record.
8

~{k-~
TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC.

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
ERIC S. DREIBAND GENERAL COUNSEL
JAMESL. LEE DEPUTYGENERALCOUNSEL
GWENDOLYN YOUNG ~AMS ASSOCIATE GENERAL \cOUNSEL

~y£)&yL
SUPERVISORY TRIAL ATTORNEY
dc«uu
MSE.NJEIOfN~R~IALLICKANTETRORNEY Pa. I.D. No. 42738 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 1001 Liberty Avenue, Suite 300 Pittsburgh, PA 15222

IT IS SO ORDERED:

BY THE COURT:

DATE: TERRENCE MeVERRY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9

EXHIBIT 1 NOTICE TO ALL TOM LANGE COMPANY. INC. EMPLOYEES

This Notice is being posted pursuant to a Consent Decree entered by the federal court in EEOC v. Tom Lange Company,Inc., Civil Action Number 05-0955 (W.D. PA.), resolving a lawsuit
filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") against Tom Lange Company Inc.

Title Vll of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., as amended, ("Title Vll"), prohibits discrimination against employees and applicants for employment based upon race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. Title Vll further prohibits retaliation against employees or applicants who avail themselves ofthe rights under TitleVll by engagingin protected activities,such as filing a charge of discrimination and/or testifying or participating in a Commission investigation. The EEOC is the federal agencywhich investigateschargesof unlawfulemploymentdiscrimination. The EEOC has the authority to bring lawsuits in federal court to enforce Title Vll.

In its lawsuit, the EEOC alleged that Tom Lange Company, Inc. subjected an employee to harassment based on his sex and discharged her in retaliation in violation of Title Vll of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title Vll"). Tom Lange Company, Inc. denies all ofthe allegations.
To resolve the case, Tom Lange Company, Inc. and the EEOC have entered in to a Consent Decree which provided, among other things, that: (1) Tom Lange Company, Inc. paid monetary relief; (2) Tom Lange Company, Inc. will not discriminate on the basis of sex; (3) Tom Lange Company, Inc. will not retaliate against any person because he or she opposed any practice made unlawful by Title Vll, filed a Title Vll charge of discrimination, participated in any Title Vll proceeding, or asserted any rights under the Consent Decree; and (4) Tom Lange Company,Inc.will train all employees regarding sexual harassment and it's policy prohibiting sexual harassment.
If you believe you have been discriminated against, youmay contact the EEOC at (800)6694000. The EEOC charges no fees and has employees who speak languages other than English.
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE

This Notice must remain posted for three years from the date below and must not be altered, defaced or covered by any other material. Any questions about this Notice or compliance with its terms may be directed to the: Regional Attorney, EEOC

Philadelphia ~tricJ)°~fice, 21 South 5th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106.

d,j~

~

TOM LANGE COMPA! Y, NC.

DATED:

DATED: fit 3 / oS

 </s> THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRlCT OF PENNSYLVANIA

VALERlE DOWDS, Plaintiff,
v. TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. TOM LAW; PHILLIP GUMPERT
Defendants.

) )
) Civil Action No. 05-0955
)
) ELECTRONICALL Y FILED
) ) Judge McVerry ) ) )

ORDER OF COURT

5 AND NOW, this 2_3'/~ of £' IY)

,2005, based upon the stipulation of

the parties, and the court having been advised that this matter has been resolved, it is hereby

ORDERED that the above civil action is DISMISSED with pr~judice, each party to bear their

own fees, costs and expenses and, FURTHER, that this court shall retainjruisdiction for

purposes of interpreting and enforcing the agreement of the parties.

Ii I 799280·y I

 </s> CM/ECF - pawd - Docket Report

https://ecf.pawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?618539204052476-L_...

U.S. District Court Western District of Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:05-cv-00955-TFM

CLOSED

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. Assigned to: Terrence F. McVerry Cause: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Date Filed: 07/13/2005 Date Terminated: 09/22/2005 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 442 Civil Rights: Jobs Jurisdiction: U.S. Government Plaintiff

Plaintiff
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

represented by Gwendolyn Young Reams Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 21 South Fifth Street Suite 400, The Bourse Building Philadelphia, PA 19106 (215) 440-2666 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Judith A. O'Boyle Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 21 South Fifth Street Suite 400, The Bourse Building Philadelphia, PA 19106 (215) 440-2666 Email: Judith.Oboyle@EEOC.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

M. Jean Clickner Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1001 Liberty Avenue Suite 300, Liberty Center Pittsburgh, PA 15222 (412) 644-6439 Fax: (412) 644-4935 Email: jean.clickner@eeoc.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Intervenor Plaintiff

1 of 4

6/11/2007 4:42 PM

CM/ECF - pawd - Docket Report

https://ecf.pawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?618539204052476-L_...

VALERIE DOWDS
V. Defendant TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC.
Intervenor Defendant PHILLIP GUMPERT Intervenor Defendant TOM LAW

represented by Francis M. Moore Mansmann & Moore 304 Ross Street Suite 600 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 232-0661 Fax: 412-232-0233 Email: Frank@mansmann-moore.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregory A. Miller Buchanan Ingersoll 301 Grant Street One Oxford Centre, 20th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 562-8800 Email: gregory.miller@bipc.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jaime S. Tuite Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney 301 Grant Street One Oxford Centre, 20th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 562-8419 Fax: (412) 562-1041 Email: Jaime.Tuite@bipc.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 07/13/2005

#

Docket Text

1 COMPLAINT against TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(plh) (Entered: 07/13/2005)

2 of 4

6/11/2007 4:42 PM

CM/ECF - pawd - Docket Report

https://ecf.pawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?618539204052476-L_...

07/13/2005 07/26/2005 07/26/2005 07/26/2005 07/27/2005 07/28/2005 08/01/2005 08/08/2005 08/09/2005 08/09/2005 08/09/2005
08/09/2005 08/09/2005 08/10/2005
08/19/2005 08/19/2005

Summons Issued as to TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC.. (plh) (Entered: 07/13/2005)
2 SUMMONS/Return of Service Returned Executed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. served on 7/20/2005, answer due 8/9/2005. (Clickner, M.) (Entered: 07/26/2005)
3 MOTION to Intervene by VALERIE DOWDS. (Attachments: # 1 Complaint)(ksa) (Entered: 07/26/2005)
4 NOTICE of Appearance by Gregory A. Miller on behalf of TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. (Miller, Gregory) (Entered: 07/26/2005)
5 ORDER OF RECUSAL. Judge Arthur J. Schwab recused. Signed by Judge Arthur J. Schwab on 7/27/05. (smk) (Entered: 07/27/2005)
Judge Terrence F. McVerry added. (ept) (Entered: 07/28/2005)
6 Order Response re 3 Motion to Intervene, Set Response: Response to Motion and Reply to Response Deadlines.Response to Motion due by 8/10/2005. Signed by Judge Terrence F. McVerry on 8/1/2005. (kll) (Entered: 08/01/2005)
7 RESPONSE to Motion re 3 MOTION to Intervene filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Clickner, M.) (Entered: 08/08/2005)
TEXT ORDER granting 3 Motion to Intervene. The Clerk shall file the attached Complaint forthwith. Text only entry; no PDF document will issue.Signed by Judge Terrence F. McVerry on 8/9/2005. (kll) (Entered: 08/09/2005)
8 BRIEF in Support re 3 MOTION to Intervene filed by VALERIE DOWDS. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(crw, ) (Entered: 08/09/2005)
9 MOTION to Dismiss EEOC COMPLAINT by TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A# 2 Exhibit Exhibit B# 3 Exhibit Exhibit C# 4 Exhibit Exhibit D# 5 Exhibit Exhibit E# 6 Proposed Order)(Tuite, Jaime) (Entered: 08/09/2005)
10 BRIEF in Support re 9 MOTION to Dismiss EEOC COMPLAINT filed by TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC.. (Tuite, Jaime) (Entered: 08/09/2005)
11 Intervenor COMPLAINT filed by VALERIE DOWDS adding Tom Law and Phillip Gumpert as Intervenor Defts. (plh) (Entered: 08/22/2005)
Text Order Response re 9 Motion to Dismiss, 10 Brief in Support of Motion.Responses due by 9/9/2005. Text only entry; no PDF document will issue.Signed by Judge Terrence F. McVerry on 8/10/2005. (kll) (Entered: 08/10/2005)
12 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by VALERIE DOWDS. TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC. waiver sent on 8/10/2005, answer due 10/11/2005. (plh) (Entered: 08/22/2005)
13 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by VALERIE DOWDS. TOM LAW waiver sent on 8/10/2005, answer due 10/11/2005. (plh) (Entered: 08/22/2005)

3 of 4

6/11/2007 4:42 PM

CM/ECF - pawd - Docket Report

https://ecf.pawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?618539204052476-L_...

08/19/2005 09/06/2005
09/20/2005 09/22/2005 09/23/2005 09/23/2005

14 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by VALERIE DOWDS. PHILLIP GUMPERT waiver sent on 8/10/2005, answer due 10/11/2005. (plh) (Entered: 08/22/2005)
15 BRIEF in Opposition re 9 MOTION to Dismiss EEOC COMPLAINT filed by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Appendix, Part I, to Commission's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss# 2 Appendix Appendix, Part II, to Commission's Opposition to Motion to Dismiss)(Clickner, M.) (Entered: 09/06/2005)
16 CONSENT DECREE by EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION. (Clickner, M.) (Entered: 09/20/2005)
17 Approved Consent Decree. Signed by Judge Terrence F. McVerry on 9/21/05. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit - Notice to All Tom Lange Company, Inc. Employees) (jcm) (Entered: 09/22/2005)
18 STIPULATION of Dismissal by PHILLIP GUMPERT, TOM LAW, TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Miller, Gregory) (Entered: 09/23/2005)
19 ORDER re 18 Stipulation of Dismissal filed by TOM LANGE COMPANY, INC., TOM LAW, PHILLIP GUMPERT. Signed by Judge Terrence F. McVerry on 9/23/05. (cc) (Entered: 09/23/2005)

PACER Service Center

Transaction Receipt

06/11/2007 17:44:40

PACER Login:

hs0328

Client Code:

Description:

Docket Report

Search Criteria:

Billable Pages: 2

Cost:

eeoc 2:05-cv-00955-TFM 0.16

4 of 4

6/11/2007 4:42 PM

 </s> EEOC LITIGATION SETTLEMENT REPORT - September 2005

http://www.eeoc.gov/litigation/settlements/settlement09-05.html

EEOC v. Tom Lange Co., Inc. No. 05-0955 (W.D. Pa. Sept. 22, 2005)
The Philadelphia District Office brought this Title VII case alleging that defendant, a wholesale distributor of fresh fruits and vegetables headquartered in Springfield, Illinois, permitted a sexually hostile work environment at its Pittsburgh facility and retaliated against charging party, an administrative assistant, for complaining about her male supervisor's unwelcome behavior. After 18 years as an administrative assistant for defendant, charging party was terminated in May 2004. Seven years earlier, the male office manager began engaging in unwelcome sexual conduct toward charging party (touching her breasts, rubbing her shoulders, requesting sex, and commenting on her sexy appearance). She repeatedly asked him to stop, and complained to the CEO. After the CEO warned him about his behavior, the office manager stopped the harassment, but recommenced the behavior 2 years later. Charging party complained numerous time to the CEO, who finally came to Pittsburgh and met with the office manager. The CEO told charging party that his investigation did not reveal any violation of legal standards, but that he had alerted the office manager of charging party's concerns and the need to maintain a professional and legally appropriate work environment. Defendant fired charging party 3 weeks later, ostensibly for insubordinate behavior and "failure to follow company policy." In the days leading up to her termination, she complained to the CEO that the office manager was forcing her to work extra hours without pay and had reprimanded her for being 3 minutes late but had not disciplined a coworker who was frequently late.
Under the 3-year consent decree resolving this case, charging party will receive $150,000 in monetary relief. The decree enjoins defendant from sex discrimination under Title VII, and specifically from creating, fostering, or tolerating a sexually hostile work environment. Defendant is also enjoined from retaliating against any person for engaging in activity protected under Title VII.

1 of 1

6/11/2007 4:54 PM


[CONTENT] July 13, 2005 | the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission | EEOC | the Western District Court | Title VII of the Civil Rights Act | 1964 | the Civil Rights Act | 1991 | Tom Lange Company, Inc. ||| EEOC ||| July 26, 2005 ||| September 20, 2005 | the District Court | Terrence F. McVerry | 100,000 | 50,000 [SUMMARY] On July 13, 2005, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), on behalf of a female employee at a distributor of fruits and vegetables (plaintiff-intervenor), filed a lawsuit in the Western District Court of Pennsylvania, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, against Tom Lange Company, Inc.  The EEOC sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorneys' fees, and other forms of affirmative relief, claiming that the defendant subjected the plaintiff-intervenor to a sexually hostile work environment and retaliated against her after she complained about sexual harassment.  

On July 26, 2005, the plaintiff-intervenor filed a complaint alleging the same as the plaintiff above but adding state claims against her supervisors.  On September 20, 2005, the District Court (Judge Terrence F. McVerry) entered a consent decree where the defendant, among other things, agreed to pay the plaintiff-intervenor $100,000, and pay plaintiff-intervenor's counsel $50,000 in attorneys' fees.