This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
Retaliation
Sexual Harassment

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Fry's Electronics Inc.

Published: Sep. 22, 2012 | Result Date: Aug. 30, 2012 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:10-CV-1562-RSL Settlement –  $2,300,000

Court

USDC Washington


Attorneys

Plaintiff

May R. Che
(U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission)

Molly B. Powell

William R. Tamayo

John F. Stanley


Defendant

Barry A. Johnsrud
(Jackson Lewis PC)

Michael A. Griffin

April L. Upchurch


Facts

The assistant store manager at a Fry's retail store in Renton, Washington sexually harassed 20 year-old sales associate America Rios. He frequently sent her sexually charged text messages and invited her to his house to drink. America Rios complained of the sexual harassment to her direct supervisor, Ka Lam. Ka Lam was fired within two weeks of reporting the harassment to higher management at Fry's corporate headquarters. He was told that his termination was due to a decline in his performance, but his work was consistently commended prior to that incident. America Rios continued to work for Fry's for several months. However, within weeks after responding to Lam's retaliation charge with the EEOC, and after having her duties altered and hours changed in a way that limited her sales, Fry's fired her for false reasons, claiming that she had poor sales.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed a sexual harassment and retaliation suit against Fry's Electronics. The Blankenship Law Firm intervened in the federal lawsuit on behalf of Lam and Rios and added state law claims to the case. After completing discovery jointly and filing a sanctions motion against Fry's in federal court, Fry's compelled the individual Plaintiffs to arbitration. The Blankenship Law Firm completed trial in arbitration in June 2012. The EEOC case, not subject to arbitration, was scheduled for trial in November 2012.

On June 3, 2012 the Federal Court found issued an Order sanctioning Fry's for discovery abuses and spoliation (willful destruction or withholding of relevant evidence). The Court ordered Fry's to pay $100,000 while striking Fry's affirmative defenses and admitting evidence in support of Plaintiffs' claims. Further, the Court ordered a Special Master be chosen to review all of Fry's documents and written discovery and report back to Judge Lasnik regarding any further discovery violations.

Prior to receiving a ruling in arbitration or the selection of a Special Master, the parties reached a settlement.

Result

The parties settled for $2.3 million. The Court additionally imposed $100,000 in sanctions for discovery abuses. Beyond providing monetary relief to Lam and Rios, Fry's agreed to take steps to prevent future harassment and retaliation, and report new claims of harassment or retaliation to the EEOC.


#121906

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390