Montgomery, Judge Ann D.

English

DigitalCommons@ILR

Cornell University ILR School 
DigitalCommons@ILR 
ADAAA Case Repository Labor and Employment Law Program 
2-14-2008 
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. 
Leiferman Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a Harmon Autoglass, and Auto 
Glass Repair and Windshield Replacement Services, Inc., 
Defendant. 
Judge Ann D. Montgomery 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/adaaa 
Thank you for downloading this resource, provided by the ILR School's Labor and Employment 
Law Program. Please help support our student research fellowship program with a gift to the 
Legal Repositories! 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Labor and Employment Law Program at 
DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been accepted for inclusion in ADAAA Case Repository by an authorized 
administrator of DigitalCommons@ILR. For more information, please contact catherwood-dig@cornell.edu. 
If you have a disability and are having trouble accessing information on this website or need materials in an 
alternate format, contact web-accessibility@cornell.edu for assistance. 
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Leiferman Enterprises, 
LLC, d/b/a Harmon Autoglass, and Auto Glass Repair and Windshield 
Replacement Services, Inc., Defendant. 
Keywords 
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Leiferman Enterprises LLC d/b/a Harmon Autoglass, Auto 
Glass Repair, Windshield Replacement Services Inc., 0:06-CV-3841, Consent decree / Settlement, 
Disparate Treatment, Termination, Diabetes, Service, Employment Law, ADAAA 
This article is available at DigitalCommons@ILR: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/adaaa/145 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA 
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 
COMMISSION, 
Plaintiff, 
v. 
LEIFERMAN ENTERPRISES, LLC, 
d/b/a HARMON AUTOGLASS, and 
AUTO GLASS REPAIR AND WINDSHIELD 
REPLACEMENT SERVICES, INC., 
Defendants. 
CIVIL NO. 0:06-CV-3841 
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER RESOLVING CLAIMS AGAINST AUTO GLASS 
REPAIR AND WINDSHIELD REPLACMENT SERVICES, INC. 
This action was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
(“Commission”) against defendant Leiferman Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a Harmon AutoGlass 
(“Leiferman”) pursuant to Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”) and 
Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices on the basis of 
disability and to provide appropriate relief to Steve W. Dolge. The Commission alleged Mr. 
Dolge was adversely affected by such practices when his employment with Harmon/Leiferman 
was terminated because of his disability, Type I diabetes. The Commission alleged that Auto 
Glass Repair and Windshield Replacement Services, Inc. (“AutoGlass”), as successor to 
Leiferman, was liable for the matters alleged against Leiferman, solely because of its successor 
status. The Commission does not allege that AutoGlass acted in violation of the ADA, nor does 
this Consent Decree constitute a finding or admission of any wrongdoing by AutoGlass under the 
ADA or otherwise. The Commission and defendant AutoGlass (the “parties” to this Consent 
Decree) have agreed to resolve this matter pursuant to this Consent Decree, without continuing 
to trial on the merits of the Commission’s claim against AutoGlass. 
NOW, THEREFORE, the Court having carefully examined the terms and provisions of 
this Consent Decree, and based on the pleadings, record and stipulations of the parties, it is 
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT: 
1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and over the parties for 
purposes of entering and enforcing this Decree. 
2. The terms of this Decree are adequate, fair, reasonable, equitable and just. 
3. This Decree conforms with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and is not in derogation 
of the rights or privileges of any person. The entry of this Decree will further the 
objectives of the ADA, and will be in the best interests of the parties, those for whom 
EEOC seeks relief, and the public. 
4. This Decree resolves all claims against AutoGlass arising out of the Charge of 
Discrimination filed by Steve W. Dolge against Harmon Auto Glass, EEOC Charge No. 
265-2005-00540, and constitutes a complete resolution of all claims under the ADA that 
were made or could have been made by him against AutoGlass in that charge. The 
parties further agree that this Decree does not resolve any other claims, including claims 
against Leiferman arising from that charge. This Decree does not and shall not be 
deemed to prejudice or in any way resolve the claims of EEOC against Leiferman, and all 
those claims shall remain pending in this action and may be pursued by EEOC against 
Leiferman. 
2 
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 
1. Dissemination of Policy Statement. 
AutoGlass agrees to issue and disseminate to all its employees, within 60 days of 
execution of this Consent Decree, an effective policy in regard to the ADA, including a clear and 
effective procedure for requesting reasonable accommodation. Said policy shall be disseminated 
to all new employees for two years from the date of execution of this Consent Decree. 
2. Training. 
Within 120 days of execution of this Consent Decree AutoGlass shall provide training in 
regard to the policy described in the preceding paragraph, to all its employees and shall provide 
the EEOC’s Milwaukee Area Office with a list of those trained and the date and description of 
the training provided. Such training shall be conducted by one or more trainers, chosen by 
AutoGlass from its in-house human resources staff or from outside, with the consent of the 
Commission, and shall include training in regard to the ADA, reasonable accommodation, and 
the interactive process for determining reasonable accommodation. 
3. Posting. 
AutoGlass shall place a public notice, in a conspicuous place, at all of its locations, for a 
period of one year from the date of entry of this Consent Decree and Order. The notice shall be 
in a form attached as Exhibit A, and shall be captioned “Notice To All Employees.” 
4. Certification to Commission. 
Upon compliance with the foregoing provisions in paragraphs 1-3 of this Injunctive 
Relief Section, AutoGlass shall promptly certify to the undersigned counsel for the Commission 
that it has complied with them. 
3 
5. Reporting. 
AutoGlass shall report in writing to the EEOC’s Milwaukee Area Office, every six 
months starting with June 1, 2008 and continuing until December 31, 2008, all requests for 
reasonable accommodation at AutoGlass subject to the Americans with Disabilities Act, with 
details including the specific facts of the request, the persons involved, and the actions taken by 
AutoGlass to respond to the request. 
6. Record Retention. 
For three years from the entry of this Consent Decree and Order, AutoGlass shall 
maintain all records pertaining to the requests reported in paragraph 5 hereof. AutoGlass shall 
make such records available for inspection by the Commission. 
MONETARY RELIEF 
AutoGlass agrees, within 15 days of signature of this Consent Decree and Order by the 
Court, to pay to Mr. Dolge $45,000, consisting of $20,000 for lost wages (less proper 
withholdings) and $25,000 for damages. AutoGlass shall pay its own share of all applicable 
withholdings, which shall not reduce the award. AutoGlass shall mail the payment to Mr. Dolge 
at 11972 36th Circle N.E., St. Michael, MN 55376, and shall simultaneously provide a copy of 
the payment check(s) to the undersigned counsel for the Commission. 
SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED this 14th day of February 2008. 
s/Ann D. Montgomery 
JUDGE ANN D. MONTGOMERY 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
4 
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 
COMMISSION 
1801 “L” Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20507 
RONALD S. COOPER 
General Counsel 
JAMES LEE 
Deputy General Counsel 
GWENDOLYN YOUNG REAMS 
Associate General Counsel 
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY 
COMMISSION 
Milwaukee Area Office 
310 W. Wisconsin Ave., Suite 800 
Milwaukee, WI 53203-2292 
Phone (414) 297-1130 
s/John C. Hendrickson Date: December 20, 2007 
JOHN C. HENDRICKSON 
Regional Attorney 
s/Jean P. Kamp Date: December 20, 2007 
JEAN P. KAMP 
Associate Regional Attorney 
s/Brian C. Tyndall Date: December 20, 2007 
BRIAN C. TYNDALL 
Senior Trial Attorney 
Auto Glass Repair and Windshield Replacement Services, Inc. 
s/Mark Reese Date: January 30, 2008 
President 
5 
Exhibit A 
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES 
This notice is being posted by order of the Court in a lawsuit brought against Leiferman 
Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Harmon AutoGlass (“Leiferman”) and Auto Glass Repair and Windshield 
Replacement Services, Inc. (“AutoGlass”) by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity 
Commission (“EEOC”). The EEOC alleged that Leiferman violated the Americans With 
Disabilities Act of 1990 when it terminated the employment of one of its glass installers because 
of his diabetes, and that AutoGlass, as successor to Leiferman, was liable for the violation, solely 
because of its successor status. The Commission did not allege that AutoGlass acted in violation 
of the ADA, nor has there been a finding or admission of any wrongdoing by AutoGlass under 
the ADA or otherwise. This lawsuit has been resolved as to AutoGlass without a finding of 
wrongdoing by AutoGlass. 
Should you have any complaints of discrimination based on disability, contact 
AutoGlass’s Human Resources Manager, or the local EEOC office in Minneapolis. EEOC 
charges no fee for its services, and has employees who speak languages other than English. 
EEOC’s offices are accessible to individuals with disabilities. 
THIS IS AN OFFICIAL NOTICE 
AND MUST NOT BE DEFACED BY ANYONE 
Dated: January 30, 2008 
s/Mark Reese 
President 
6 


Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Leiferman Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a Harmon Autoglass, and Auto Glass Repair and Windshield Replacement Services, Inc., Defendant.

https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1084&amp;context=adaaa

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Plaintiff, v. Leiferman Enterprises, LLC, d/b/a Harmon Autoglass, and Auto Glass Repair and Windshield Replacement Services, Inc., Defendant.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@ILR