Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Dillard's Inc
| Equal Employment Opportunity Commission |
| Dillard's Inc |
| 4:2016mc00008 |
| May 27, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Little Rock Office |
| D. P. Marshall |
| Other |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
39
ORDER: The Court directs the Clerk to close this case, No. 38 . Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/26/2017. (jak)
|
|
Filing
38
ORDER: The deadline for any motion for additional mailings has come and gone, and the questionnaire response period has ended. The Court assumes the EEOC is providing Dillard's with any recently received responses. If so, then the parties have complied with the Court's Orders, 18 , 35 , & 37 , and this matter is concluded. The Court will close the file unless a party seeks some relief before 6/23/2017. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/7/2017. (jak)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER: Second joint status report 36 noted and appreciated. Proposed questionnaire schedule, 36 at 2, approved and adopted. Proposed schedule for disclosure of responses, 36 at 3, approved and adopted. For now, things stay in the EEOC's capable hands. Dillard's lawyers are entitled to more information if the sampling hits a snag and full information when the process is done. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/13/2017. (jak)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER granting as modified the EEOC's application to enforce the subpoena, 1 . By 9/2/2016, Dillard's must produce the requested information, as limited by the parties' agreement at the hearing, about Dillard's Little Rock-based Executive Development Program that was compiled for Dr. Metzger's review. By 9/19/2016, Dillard's must produce the employee information, limited to black and mixed-race current and former employees at retail locations and they must further supplement its production on the Executive Development Program. If a second supplement on that Program is needed, it's due by 10/3/2016. By 10/3/2016, the EEOC must propose to Dillard's how best to make inquiry to current and former employe es to achieve a representative sample, while minimizing the likelihood of disruption to Dillard's business. By 10/3/2016 the EEOC must also propose to Dillard's the draft cover letter and questionnaire. The Court directs good faith collaboration on all these issues. Joint report on sample size and method, as well as on the draft cover letter and questionnaire due by 10/14/2016. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 8/22/2016. (jak)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER granting the EEOC's motion for an order to show case, 1 , why Dillard's Inc., should not have to comply with a subpoena duces tecum from the Commission. The Court requests a response from Dillard's to the EEOC's subpoena by 1 July 2016. Any reply from the EEOC is due by 13 July 2016. The Court orders a person authorized to speak for Dillard's to appear and explain why the company shouldn't be compelled by the Court to comply with the subpoena. The show-cause hearing will be held in courtroom B155, Richard Sheppard Arnold U.S. Courthouse, 500 West Capitol Avenue, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201, on 22 July 2016 at 9:00 a.m. If a party fails to appear at the hearing, the Court will consider imposing a sanction . The Court directs the U.S. Marshal to serve this Order on Dillard's Inc.'s registered agent for service, the Corporation Company, by certified mail as soon as practicable and file a return in due course. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/7/2016. (jak)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
