Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. SDI of Mineola, Texas, L.L.C.

E.D. Texas

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. SDI of Mineola, Texas, L.L.C.

DecidedSeptember 9, 2022

Docket6:21-cv-00226

StatusUnknown

This text of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. SDI of Mineola, Texas, L.L.C. (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. SDI of Mineola, Texas, L.L.C.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. SDI of Mineola, Texas, L.L.C., (E.D. Tex. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:21-cv-00226 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, V. SDI of Mineola, L.L.C. d/b/a Sonic Drive-In et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) filed this action for sexual harassment and hostile work environment on behalf of Vanessa Spurgeon, Krystin McElya, Trin- ity Hollingsworth, Ashleigh Stein, Shelby Henson, Lauren Crump, Gabrielle Jerome, Sage Mizer, and other aggrieved female employ- ees (“Claimants”). Doc. 1. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Doc. 3. On August 17, 2022, the magistrate judge issued a report recom- mending that defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 51) be denied. Doc. 76. Defendants did not file written objections. When a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s report, the court reviews the record only for clear error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satis- fied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommendation. The court denies defendants’ motion for sum- mary judgment. So ordered by the court on September 9, 2022. face BARKER United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:21-cv-00226 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, V. SDI of Mineola, L.L.C. d/b/a Sonic Drive-In et al., Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) filed this action for sexual harassment and hostile work environment on behalf of Vanessa Spurgeon, Krystin McElya, Trin- ity Hollingsworth, Ashleigh Stein, Shelby Henson, Lauren Crump, Gabrielle Jerome, Sage Mizer, and other aggrieved female employ- ees (“Claimants”). Doc. 1. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Doc. 3. On August 17, 2022, the magistrate judge issued a report recom- mending that defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. 51) be denied. Doc. 76. Defendants did not file written objections. When a party fails to object to a magistrate judge’s report, the court reviews the record only for clear error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satis- fied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommendation. The court denies defendants’ motion for sum- mary judgment. So ordered by the court on September 9, 2022. face BARKER United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. SDI of Mineola, Texas, L.L.C., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/equal-employment-opportunity-commission-v-sdi-of-mineola-texas-llc-txed-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack