From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

E.E.O.C. v. Timeless Investments, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 3, 2010
1:08-cv-1469 AWI SMS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 3, 2010)

Opinion

1:08-cv-1469 AWI SMS.

July 3, 2010


ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL BRIEFING TO BE FILED BY 4:00 P.M. JULY 13, 2010


Currently pending before the Court is Defendant's motion for summary judgment, which is set for hearing on July 26, 2010. In Defendant's motion, Defendant argues in part that Plaintiff failed to engage in good faith conciliation efforts as required by 29 U.S.C. § 626(d). See Court's Docket Doc. No. 31 — at p. 11. Defendant requests that the Court dismiss the case and award attorney's fees for Plaintiff's alleged failure to properly conciliate. See id.

Plaintiff also has a motion for summary judgment set for hearing on July 26, 2010. However, this order concerns an argument made in Defendant's motion.

Prior to filing suit under the ADEA, the EEOC must attempt conciliation with the employer. 29 U.S.C. § 626(d); EEOC v. Pan American World Airways, Inc., 897 F.2d 1499, 1505 n. 5 (9th Cir. 1990); see also EEOC v. Bruno's Restaurant, 13 F.3d 285, 288 (9th Cir. 1992). Some courts have approved the dismissal of the case and the award of attorney's fees against the EEOC for a failure to engage in a good faith conciliation. E.g. EEOC v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co., 340 F.3d 1256, 1261 (11th Cir. 2003). However, it has also been held that courts have the authority to stay judicial proceedings in order for the EEOC to make further conciliation efforts. E.g. Brennan v. Ace Hardware Corp., 495 F.2d 368, 376 (8th Cir. 1974). The Court believes that additional briefing on the issue of whether the Court should stay the proceedings for further conciliation efforts (if the Court later finds that the EEOC did not conciliate in good faith) would be beneficial.

The Court emphasizes that it has not determined that the EEOC breached the duty to conduct a good faith conciliation. The Court merely wishes to hear the parties' respective positions on the possibility of a stay for further conciliation proceedings.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. On or by 4:00 p.m. July 13, 2010, the parties shall each file a brief on the issue of whether the Court should stay the proceedings for further conciliation efforts if the Court later finds that the EEOC did not conciliate in good faith; and 2. All other dates and deadlines remain unchanged. IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

E.E.O.C. v. Timeless Investments, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 3, 2010
1:08-cv-1469 AWI SMS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 3, 2010)
Case details for

E.E.O.C. v. Timeless Investments, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. TIMELESS…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jul 3, 2010

Citations

1:08-cv-1469 AWI SMS (E.D. Cal. Jul. 3, 2010)