Del Pino v. AT & T Information Systems, Inc.

• Decision Date: 03 January 1996
• Docket Number: No. 89-579-CIV.,89-579-CIV.
• Citation: 921 F. Supp. 761
• Parties: Isabel DEL PINO, Plaintiff, v. AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida

921 F. Supp. 761

Isabel DEL PINO, Plaintiff, v. AT & T INFORMATION SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant.

No. 89-579-CIV.

United States District Court, S.D. Florida.

January 3, 1996.

Michael W. Casey, III, Muller, Mintz, Kornreich, Caldwell, Casey, Crosland & Bramnick, P.A., Miami, FL, for AT & T Information Systems, Inc.

William Candela, Dade County Attorney's Office, Miami, FL, for Dade County.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR INJUNCTION TO ENFORCE FINAL JUDGMENT

HIGHSMITH, District Judge.

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Linnea R. Johnson on December 8, 1995, regarding Defendant AT & T Information Systems, Inc.'s motion for injunction to enforce final judgment. Upon an independent review of the file, including consideration of the plaintiff's objections and the defendant's response to said objections, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

(1) Defendant AT & T Information Systems, Inc.'s motion for injunction to enforce final judgment is GRANTED.

(2) The Court hereby ADOPTS the findings of fact and conclusions of law contained in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.

(3) Plaintiff Isabel Del Pino and anyone acting on her behalf, are hereby PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from proceeding in the administrative matter captioned Isabel Del Pino and AT & T Information Systems, Inc., DCEOB Charge No. 89-1209141 and EEOC Charge No. XXX-XX-XXXX, before the Dade County Equal Opportunity Board, or in any other administrative actions or lawsuits which encroach upon this Order, the Final Judgment, other orders issued by this Court, or the Court's jurisdiction, in the above-styled case.

(4) All representatives of the Dade County Equal Opportunity Board, as well as any one acting on their behalf are hereby PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from proceeding in the administrative matter captioned Isabel Del Pino and AT & T Information Systems, Inc., DCEOB Charge No. 89-1209141 and EEOC Charge No. XXX-XX-XXXX, and from otherwise interfering with the jurisdiction of this Court in the above-styled case.

(5) Within thirty days of the date of this Order, the Dade County Equal Opportunity Board shall enter an order dismissing the administrative matter captioned Isabel Del Pino and AT & T Information Systems, Inc., DCEOB Charge No. 89-1209141 and EEOC Charge No. XXX-XX-XXXX, with prejudice, based on the res judicata effect of this Court's Final Judgment in the above-styled case.

DONE AND ORDERED.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PERMANENT INJUNCTION

JOHNSON, United States Magistrate Judge.

THIS CAUSE is before the undersigned Magistrate Judge on Defendant's Motion for Injunction to Enforce Final Judgment Docket No. 93. On June 8, 1990, this Court, through the late Honorable Eugene Spellman, entered Final Judgment in favor of Defendant as to all of Plaintiff's claims against Defendant. Docket No. 78 The question presented here is whether, based upon that Final Judgment, Florida's doctrine of res judicata bars Plaintiff's pending administrative claim before the Dade County Equal Opportunity Board ("EOB") in the matter styled Isabel Del Pino and AT & T Information Systems, Inc., DCEOB Charge No. 89-1209141 and EEOC Charge No. XXX-XX-XXXX; and thereby warrants a permanent injunction from this Court under the All-Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, to protect and effectuate this Court's Final Judgment.

The Court entered an Order Granting Temporary Injunction and Prescribing Briefing Schedule Docket No. 105 on October 16, 1995. That Order was based upon the Court's review of the record in this matter and the Report and Recommendation Docket No. 104 entered by the undersigned Magistrate Judge on October 2, 1995, which Report and Recommendation was entered following a hearing before the undersigned Magistrate Judge on September 28, 1995. The undersigned conducted a second hearing in this matter on December 5, 1995. The following findings of fact and conclusions of law are based upon the record in this case including the memoranda, evidence and arguments submitted to the Court by the parties. The undersigned recommends entry of a permanent injunction against Plaintiff and the Dade County EOB.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Defendant terminated Plaintiff's employment in November of 1988. Plaintiff filed a charge of employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission based upon her termination and the alleged denial of tuition reimbursement. Through a work-sharing agreement, the EEOC deferred the investigation of Plaintiff's Title VII discrimination charge to the Dade County Equal Opportunity Board. Plaintiff, through her attorney, also filed suit in Dade County Circuit Court in February of 1989 alleging wrongful termination of employment, breach of contract, fraud, and failure to reimburse for tuition expenses. Defendant removed the action to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction.

On June 1, 1989 Plaintiff moved to voluntarily dismiss her Amended Complaint without prejudice or to abate the action pending the results of the investigation of her discrimination charges with the Dade County EOB. The Court granted Plaintiff's request to dismiss her lawsuit without prejudice. However, Plaintiff apparently changed her mind, and asked the Court to reinstate her lawsuit. Plaintiff also continued to pursue her administrative claims before the Board. Plaintiff has acknowledged that she was repeatedly urged by Defendant's counsel to merge all of her claims before this Court.

Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment as to all of Plaintiff's claims in this Court. The undersigned Magistrate Judge issued a report recommending that Defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted. United States District Court Judge Eugene Spellman accepted the Report and Recommendation and entered Final Judgment on the merits against Plaintiff as to all of the counts in her lawsuit. Del Pino v. AT & T, 5 Indiv.Empl.R.Cas. (BNA) 969, 1990 WL 208694 (S.D.Fla.1990). Judge Spellman entered a Final Judgment dated June 8, 1990. Plaintiff did not appeal the Court's Final Judgment.

Defendant notified the Dade County EOB of the Court's final judgment and asserted the res judicata defense in that proceeding. Nevertheless, the Dade County EOB's Director entered a "No Cause" determination as to the merits of Plaintiff's discrimination claim before that agency on May 19, 1993. In addition to that "No Cause" finding, the Dade County EOB's investigative report stated that the Dade County EOB's legal counsel from the Dade County Attorney's Office had rendered a legal opinion that Florida's doctrine of res judicata barred further proceedings before the Dade County EOB regarding her discrimination charge. Plaintiff appealed the "No Cause" determination, thereby requesting a hearing before the Dade County EOB regarding the merits of her discrimination charge.

Defendant filed a motion to dismiss that appeal based on the doctrine of res judicata. At a hearing before the Dade County EOB in June of 1994, after receiving advice from the Dade County EOB's legal counsel from the Dade County Attorney's Office that the doctrine of res judicata barred Plaintiff's claims, the Dade County EOB's Chairperson granted Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's appeal. However, in February of 1995, the Dade County EOB refused to adopt that earlier order dismissing the appeal, notwithstanding another legal opinion from the Dade County EOB's counsel, and notwithstanding similar legal opinions by both of the Dade County EOB members (who sat as part of that quorum and also were attorneys), that res judicata barred further proceedings of Plaintiff's discrimination charge. The Dade County EOB later refused to consider a motion for reconsideration filed by Defendant in April of 1995.

The Dade County EOB scheduled a hearing on the merits of Plaintiff's discrimination charge for October 5, 1995. On September 14, 1995, Defendant filed its Motion for Injunction to Enforce Final Judgment Docket No. 93 along with a supporting Memorandum of Law Docket No. 96, a Statement of Undisputed Facts Docket No. 95, and an Appendix Docket No. 96 of documents and pleadings from this Court's file and from the record of proceedings before the Dade County EOB.

The Court referred Defendant's Motion for Injunction to Enforce Final Judgment to the undersigned Magistrate Judge who held a hearing on September 28, 1995 to examine the merits of Defendant's request for injunctive relief before the Dade County EOB hearing that was scheduled for October 5, 1995. Plaintiff appeared pro se at the September 28th hearing. Defendant and the Dade County EOB and Metropolitan Dade County were represented by their respective legal counsel. Counsel for the Dade County EOB stated that the Dade County EOB and the County viewed this as a private dispute between Plaintiff and Defendant. Accordingly, the Dade County EOB's counsel took no position as to Defendant's request for injunctive relief. (As noted above, the attorney for the Dade County EOB had previously advised the Dade County EOB that res judicata did bar the Dade County EOB from considering Plaintiff's charges on their merits.)

Following that hearing, the undersigned Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation Docket No. 104 recommending entry of a temporary injunction against Plaintiff and the Dade County EOB. The Court entered an Order granting the preliminary injunction for a forty-five (45) day period and therein also prescribed a briefing schedule which allowed Plaintiff through October 31, 1995 to file responses to Defendant's request for relief. Plaintiff filed a motion to rescind the temporary injunction along with a memorandum of law. Docket Nos. 106 and 107 Defendant filed a supplemental motion and memorandum of law, renewing its request for entry of a permanent injunction. The undersigned denied Plaintiff's motion to rescind and scheduled a...