EEOC and Elina Masid Et Al. V. Caesars Entertainment, Inc. Et Al
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Case 2:05-cv-00427-LRH-PAL Document 170 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 1 of 17 1 Anna Y. Park, CA SBN 164242 Connie Liem, TX SBN 791113 2 Victor Viramontes, CA SBN 214158 Angela Morrison, NV SBN 9630 3 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 4 255 East Temple Street, 4tb Floor Los Angeles, CA 90012 5 Telephone: (213^1 894-1083 Facsimile: (213)894-1301 6 [email protected] 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 8 OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION 9 Patrick Hicks, NV SBN 4642 Veronica Areclicdcrra Hall, NV SBN 5855 10 Deborah Westbrook, NV SBN 9285 LITTLER MENDELSON 11 3960 Howard Hughes Parkway. Suite 300 Las Vegas, NV 89169 12 Telephone: (702) 862-8800 Facsimile: (702) 862-8811 13 Attorneys for Defendants 14 CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT, INC., et al. 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 17 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, 18 CASE NO. 2:05-CV-0427 LRH (PAL) Plaintiff 19 CONSENT DECREE; ORDER 20 CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT, INC., ct al., DOES 1-10 INCLUSIVE, 21 The Honorable Larry L. Hicks Defendants. U.S. District Court Judge 22 ELINAMASID, etal., 23 PlainLiif-Intervenors, 24 25 CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT, INC., ct al., 26 DOES 1-10 INCLUSIVE, 27 Defendants. 28 Case 2:05-cv-00427-LRH-PAL Document 170 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 2 of 17 I. 1JSTKODUCTION A. Plaintiff U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC" or "Commission") tiled this action against Caesars Entertainment, Inc., Park Place Entertainment Corp., Desert Palace, Inc., Harrah's Entertainment, Inc., Harrah's Operating Company, Inc., Caesar's World, Inc., and Caesars Palace Corp. under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et sea ("Title VII"). In its Second Amended Complaint, the EEOC alleged that Charging Parties Elina Masid, Tange Johnson, Jessica Panamcno, Candelaria Turcios, and Maribel Mendoza ("Charging Parties") and other similarly situated individuals ("Class Members") were subjected to unlawful employment practices on the basis of sex, female, in violation of Section 703(a) of Title VII. The Commission's Second Amended Complaint further alleged that the Charging Parties and other similarly situated individuals were subjected to unlawful retaliation in violation of Section 704(a) of Title VII. B. Defendant, Desert Palace, Inc. is a Nevada Corporation that does business as Caesars Palace and operates the hotel/casino located at 3570 Las Vegas Blvd. South. Desert Palace, Inc., therefore, is the proper corporate entity against whom this Decree is binding for the hotel/casino at 3570 Las Vegas, Blvd. South. At all times relevant to this action, Desert Palace, Inc. has been a wholly-owned subsidiary of Caesars Palace Corp., a Delaware Corporation and holding company. At all relevant times, Caesars Palace Corporation has been a wholly-owned subsidiary of Caesars World, Inc., a Florida Corporation which is also a holding company. At all relevant times until January 5, 2004, Caesars Wrorld, Inc. was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Park Place Entertainment Corporation. On January 5, 2004, Park Place Entertainment Corporation changed its name to Caesars Entertainment, Inc. On June 13, 2005, Caesars Entertainment, Inc. merged with and into Harrah's Operating Company, Inc., with Harrah's Operating Company, Inc. as the surviving entity after the merger. Caesars Entertainment, Inc. ceased to exist as a corporate entity at the time of the merger. Harrah's Operating Company, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Harrah's Entertainment, Inc. 2 | PROPOSED] CONSENT DECRKK; ORDER Case 2:05-cv-00427-LRH-PAL Document 170 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 3 of 17 1 C. The EEOC has agreed to dismiss with prejudice Caesars Entertainment, Inc., Park 2 Place Entertainment Corp., Harrali's Entertainment, Inc., Harrah's Operating Company, Inc., 3 Caesar's World, Inc., and Caesars Palace Corp., and shall file a stipulation to dismiss with 4 prejudice each of these parties at the same time the parties file this Decree. Therefore, Desert 5 Palace, Inc. d/b/a Caesars Palace (hereinafter "Defendant" or "Caesars Palace") is the only 6 Defendant subject to this Decree. 7 D. Caesars Palace denies unlawful discrimination, harassment or retaliation of any 8 sort and denies all allegations made by the EEOC, Charging Parties and the Class Members. 9 This Decree is not an adjudication or finding on the merits of this case and shall not be construed 10 as an admission of liability on the part of Caesars Palace. 11 E. The EEOC, Plaintiff-Intcrvcnors,1 and Caesars Palace engaged in comprehensive 12 settlement negotiations and, as a result of those negotiations, the EEOC and Caesars Palace have 13 agreed to resolve all claims between them by entry of this Decree. 14 II. 15 PURPOSES AM) SCOPE OF THE CONSENT DECREE 16 A. The parties to this Decree are the EEOC and Caesars Palace. The scope of this 17 Decree includes Defendant's facility known as Caesars Palace, located at 3570 Las Vegas Blvd. 18 South, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89109. This Decree shall be binding on and enforceable against 19 Defendant and its successors and assigns. 20 B. The parties have entered into this Decree for the following purposes: 21 1. To avoid expensive and protracted costs incident to litigation; 22 2. To provide a final and binding settlement upon the Parties; 23 3. To provide monetary and injunctive relief; 24 4. To ensure that Defendant's employment practices comply with federal 25 law; 26 27 Plaintiff-Intervenors is defined in Section VIII.(A.). 28 [PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE; ORDER Case 2:05-cv-00427-LRH-PAL Document 170 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 4 of 17 5. To ensure a work environment free from hostility and retaliation; 6. To ensure training for Defendant's managers and employees with respect to their obligations under Title VII; and 4 7. To provide an appropriate and effective mechanism for handling 5 discrimination complaints in the workplace. 6 8. There is no determination implied or expressed in this Decree regarding 7 whether the current policies, practices and procedures of Caesars Palace comply with Title VII. 8 HI. 9 RELEASE OF CLAIMS 10 A. This Decree fully and completely resolves all issues, claims and allegations by the 11 EEOC against Caesars Palace that arc raised in the EEOC's Second Amended Complaint fded in 12 this action in the United States District Court, District of Nevada, captioned U.S. Equal 13 Employment Opportunity Commission v. Caesars Entertainment, Inc., et al; Case No. CV-S- 14 0427 LRII (PAL). Because all issues, claims and allegations made by the EEOC in Case No. 15 CV-S-0427 LRH (PAL), against Caesars Entertainment, Inc., Park Place Entertainment Corp., 16 Harrah's Entertainment, Inc., Harrah's Operating Company, Inc., Caesar's World, Inc., and 17 Caesars Palace Corp. will be dismissed with prejudice, none of these entities are subject to the 18 terms of this Decree. 19 B. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed to preclude any party from bringing suit 20 to enforce this Decree in the event that any party hereto fails to perform the promises and 21 representations contained herein. 22 C. Nothing in this Decree shall be construed to limit or reduce Defendant's 23 obligation to comply fully with Title VII or any other federal employment statute. 24 D. 'this Decree in no way affects the EEOC's right to bring, process, investigate or 25 litigate other charges that may be in existence or may later arise against Defendant in accordance 26 with standard EEOC procedures. 27 28 [PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE; ORDER Case 2:05-cv-00427-LRH-PAL Document 170 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 5 of 17 1 IV. 2 JURISDICTION 3 A. The Court has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this lawsuit 4 The Complaint asserts claims that, if proven, would authorize the Court to grant the equitable 5 relief set forth in this Decree. The terms and provisions of this Decree are fair, reasonable and 6 just. This Decree conforms with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Title VII and is not in 7 derogation oflhe rights or privileges of any person, 8 B. The Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action during the duration of the Decree 9 for the purposes of entering all orders, judgments and decrees that may be necessary to 10 implement the relief provided herein. 11 V. 12 EFFECTIVE DATE AND DURATION OF DECREE 13 A. The provisions and agreements contained herein are effective immediately upon 14 the date which this Decree is entered by the Court ("the Effective Date"). 15 B. Except as otherwise provided herein, this Decree shall remain in effect for three 16 (3) years alter the Effective Date. 17 VI. 18 MODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY 19 A. This Decree constitutes the complete understanding of the parties with respect to 20 the matters contained herein. No waiver, modification or amendment of any provision of this 21 Decree will be effective unless made in writing and signed by an authorized representative of 22 each of the parties. 23 B. If one or more provisions of the Decree are rendered unlawful or unenforceable, 24 the parties shall make good faith efforts to agree upon appropriate amendments to this Decree in 25 order to effectuate the purposes of the Decree. In any event, the remaining provisions will 26 remain in full force and effect unless the purposes of the Decree cannot, despite the parties" best 27 efforts, be achieved. 28 [PROPOSED] CONSENT DECREE; ORDER Case 2:05-cv-00427-LRH-PAL Document 170 Filed 08/22/2007 Page 6 of 17 1 C. By mutual agreement oflhe parties, this Decree may be amended or modified in 2 the interests of justice and fairness in order to effectuate the provisions of this Decree.