Enron Mail

Subject:Deena Hays v. Enron North America Corp. d/b/a Enron Energy
Date:Thu, 18 Oct 2001 09:40:37 -0700 (PDT)

County, Texas
Cc: kriste.sullivan@enron.com, vicki.sharp@enron.com, c..williams@enron.com,
charles.cheek@enron.com, michelle.lawless@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: kriste.sullivan@enron.com, vicki.sharp@enron.com, c..williams@enron.com,
charles.cheek@enron.com, michelle.lawless@enron.com
X-To: Derrick Jr., James </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Jderric<
X-cc: Sullivan, Kriste </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Ksulliv<, Sharp, Vicki </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Notesaddr/cn=dc350363-f761e300-862564c2-54998e<, Williams, Robert C. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Rwillia2<, Cheek, Charles </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Ccheek<, Lawless, Michelle </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Mlawles<
X-Folder: \JDERRIC (Non-Privileged)\Deleted Items
X-Origin: Derrick-J
X-FileName: JDERRIC (Non-Privileged).pst


I wanted to give you advance notice that the referenced matter could go to trial sometime during the week of October 22, 2001. This is a wrongful termination suit (sex discrimination/hostile work environment) which was filed on December 30, 1999. Plaintiff seeks back pay, front pay and compensatory damages. The case does not present substantial exposure to the company as Plaintiff's backpay claim is less than $20,000 and I believe that the likelihood of her recovery of frontpay or compensatory damages is remote, because she quit a job with Halliburton just a few months ago and because there simply is no evidence that she suffered compensatory damages since her discharge from EES.

The case is pending before Judge Patrick Mizell. Before he proceeds with the trial, the court will have to rule on the pending motions for summary judgment, which we have filed on behalf of EES and which could very well dispose of this case. Plaintiff has not timely responded to the motions. Last week, the court allowed Plaintiff's counsel to withdraw from the case, but the court assured me that he would not postpone the trial or the hearing on the pending motions. Plaintiff has indicated that she intends to hire replacement counsel, but to date no appearance has been made on her behalf. I anticipate that she will be appearing pro se before the court. The hearing on the motion is set for October 22, 2001 and I think there is a good chance that the MSJ will be granted.

Despite several attempts over the last three months to explore pretrial resolution of this matter, Plaintiff has refused to make a settlement demand or even meet with an EES human resource representative to discuss settlement. Her unwillingness to even discuss settlement is part of the reason that her former attorneys withdrew from the case. I fully expect that we will be required to take this matter through trial if the court does not rule in our favor on the pending motions. We have made the appropriate arrangements with witnesses so that if necessary, we will be ready to go next week. We are listed third or fourth on the trailing trial docket.

I will keep you advised of any further developments. Please contact me if you have any questions.

Bob Vote
713 853 7492