Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Clarice's Home Care Service

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


December 18, 2007

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CLARICE'S HOME CARE SERVICE, INC. DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Donald G. Wilkerson United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Currently pending before the Court is a Motion to Intervene filed by Karen Collier (Doc. 7). For the reasons set forth below, this motion is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") brought this action on August 22, 2007, alleging unlawful employment practices against Defendant Clarice's Home Care Service Inc., pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, based on the Defendant's alleged refusal to hire Karen Collier because of her race and the subsequent dismissal of Clara Creason for opposing the refusal to hire Collier. Karen Collier now seeks leave to intervene as a plaintiff in the action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24.

ANALYSIS

Under Rule 24(a)(1) the Court must allow anyone to intervene who "is given an unconditional right to intervene by a federal statue." The Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides that when the EEOC chooses to pursue litigation in response to a charge of unlawful discrimination, "[t]he person or persons aggrieved shall have the right to intervene in a civil action brought by the Commissioner." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1). Thus, the statute gives parties aggrieved by the unlawful employment action an unconditional right to intervene pursuant to Rule 24(a)(1).

Karen Collier filed charges with the EEOC alleging that Defendant failed to hire her because of her race. Those charges are the basis of the current action. As such, Karen Collier may intervene in the action pursuant to Rule 24(a).

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Karen Collier's Motion to Intervene (Doc. 7) is hereby GRANTED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20071218

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.