McTyer v. Vons Grocery Company Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Consent Decree

    2 I
3

4

5

6 

7 

8 

9

10|
11

12l
13

14

15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 

221
23

24

25

26

27

28

1 BILL LANN LEE 
MARILYN 0. TESAURO 
ELSA LEYVA
CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST 
10951 W. Pico Boulevard, Third Floor 
Los Angeles, California 90064 
Telephone: 213/470-3000
JOHN HUERTA
MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE 

AND EDUCATIONAL FUND 
634 S. Spring Street, Eleventh Floor
Los Angeles, California 
Telephone: 213/629-2512
STANDLEY L. DORN 
OVERLAND, BERKE, WESLEY, 

RANDOLPH & LEVANAS 
10951 W. Pico Boulevard, 
Los Angeles, California 
Telephone: 213/474-6020

UNITED

90014

GITS,
Suite 300 
90064

STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

) Case No. 84-6938-HLH (Gx)
)) PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM
) OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
) IN SUPPORT OF APPROVAL
) OF THE PROPOSED CONSENT
) DECREE IN FULL SETTLEMENT
) OF CLASS CLAIMS;
) DECLARATION OF
) BILL LANN LEE
)

Plaintiffs request that the Court approve the proposed 
Consent Decree in Full Settlement of Class Claims pursuant to 
Rule 23(e), Fed. R. Civ. Pro.

Statement
This lawsuit arises from administrative Claims filed by 

three minority Hispanic and black employees and applicants

DONALD McTYER; ROBERT L. BLUEFORD; 
and JOE M. OLAGUE,

Plaintiffs,
v.

VONS GROCERY COMPANY,
Defendant.

ccl24#4 1



1
2

3

4

5

6

7

8 

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20 

21 

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

for employment, Donald McTyer, Robert L. Blueford, and Joe M. 
Olague, alleging classwide discrimination by the Vons Grocery 
Company in hiring and promotion. The administrative charges 
were filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 
(EEOC) in late 1983 and early 1984. After several months of 
administrative proceedings, right to sue letters were issued.
See Complaint __.

On September 14, 1984, the instant class action was 
commenced with the filing of a class action Complaint by 
plaintiffs McTyer, Blueford, and Olague alleging that Vons' 
failure to hire and promote Hispanic and black persons to entry 
level, journeyman, and department head positions in its retail 
grocery stores in the State of California violated Title VII of 
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and the 
Civil Rights Act of 1866, 42 U.S.C. § 1981. The Complaint 
alleged, inter alia, that Vons maintained an employment system 
in which minority employees and applicants for employment were 
subject to classwide discrimination, that the discriminatory 
employment system operated through a variety of enumerated 
mechanisms, and that there were resulting disparities, for 
instance, between Vons' overall 5% black employment and 13% 
Hispanic employment, and the representation of 2% black 
employees and 8% Hispanic employees in official and manager 
positions filled by promotion from lower levels. Classwide 
injunctive relief was soughvt.

On September 18, 1984, plaintiffs and defendants 
lodged with the Court a Stipulation of Agreement, -including, 
inter alia, (a) an Agreement that a class be certified for

ccl24#4 2



T

1 settlement purposes, that the parties sign and recommend for

2 approval a Consent Decree, that notice be given and a fairness
3 hearing set, and that the class representatives' individual
4 claims be resolved; (b) a 22-page proposed Consent Decree in
5 Full Settlement of Class Claims; and (c) proposed "Settlement
6 Agreement and General Release" documents for each named

7
plaintiff.

8
On September 26, 1984, at the request of the parties,

9
the Court certified a class of Hispanic and black applicants for

10
employment and employees of Vons retail stores for settlement

11 purposes, approved the parties' proposal for notice by publi­
12 cation, and scheduled a fairness hearing for November 30, 1984.
13

14
The Terms of the Proposed Consent Decree

15
in Full Settlement of Class Claims

16 The proposed Consent Decree provides, inter alia, that

17
the following measures be taken to resolve the litigation.

18
1. Vons shall engage in vigorous good faith efforts

19
to insure that blacks and Hispanics

2° (a) are hired into entry level jobs at or above

21
the annual hiring goals of 8% and 19%, respectively,

22
until ultimate goals of 8% and 19%, respectively, are

23 attained or until January 1, 1991;
■ 24 (b) are hired or promoted into journeyman jobs

25 at or above annual goals from 5.25 to 7.25% for blacks
26 and goals from 16.75 to 18.75% for Hispanics until
27

t ultimate goals of 6.25 and 17.75%, respectively, are
28 attained or until January 1, 1991; and

ccl24#4 - 3 -



1
2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

(c) are hired or promoted into department head 
jobs at or above annual goals from 4.25 to 6.25% for 
blacks and goals from 13.75 to 15.75% for Hispanics 
until ultimate goals of 5.25% and 14.75% are attained 
or until January 1, 1991.

Consent Decree, 1I1[ 20-26.
2. Vons shall in good faith engage in selective 

recruitment efforts, and in good faith conduct such hiring, 
training, and promotion programs as are necessary to 
satisfy hiring and promotional requirements. Consent 
Decree, K 16.

3. Vons is not required to hire or promote 
unqualified persons or to violate any existing bona fide 
seniority system of any collective bargaining agreement.
No particular minority employee shall receive a preference 
for any job. Consent Decree, KK 16, 17.

4. Vons shall submit a detailed annual status report 
of its compliance with the terms of the Consent Decree to 
plaintiffs' counsel. Consent Decree, K 32.

5. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce 
the Decree. Consent Decree, K 33. The Decree will be 
dissolved January 1, 1991 or earlier, in part or in whole, 
if Vons has attained the ultimate goal for any job group 
before that date. Consent Decree, KK 37-38.

6. Named plaintiff McTyer shall receive a 
retroactive appointment to journeyman meatcutter, along 
with certain privileges and benefits, as of April 15, 1982, 
and be reassigned to another store. Named plaintiff

4



1 Blueford shall receive $5,000 and named plaintiff Olague
2 shall receive $10,000. Consent Decree, U1I 39-41.
3 7. Plaintiffs' counsel shall recover costs and
4 attorneys fees. If the parties are unable to negotiate the
5 amount of costs and fees, a special master shall decide the
6 issue. Plaintiffs' counsel may apply for no more than
7 $51,000 in costs and fees. Consent Decree, 1[ 43.
8

9 Leqal Standard

10
Rule 23(e), Fed. R. Civ. Pro., declares that, "[a]

11
class action shall not be dismissed or compromised without the

12 approval of the court" after proper notice to the class. The
13 primary purpose of Rule 23(e) is "to protect the nonparty
14 members of the class from unjust or unfair settlements." 7A
15 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, § 1797, p. 226

16
(1972 ed.). "The main judicial concern is that the rights of

17
the passive class members not be jeopardized by the proposed

18 action." Id. at p. 230; Norman v. McKee, 431 F.2d 769, 774 (9th

19
Cir. 1970), cert, denied, 401 U.S. 912 (1971).

2 0 "Although Rule 23(e) is silent respecting the standard

21
by which a proposed settlement is to be evaluated, the

22 universally applied standard is whether the settlement is
23 ! fundamentally fair, adequate and reasonable." Officers for

24 Justice v. Civil Service Com'n, 688 F.2d 613, 625 (9th Cir.
25 1982).
26 The district court's ultimate determination
27 will necessarily involve a balancing of ~
28 several factors which may include, among

ccl24#4 - 5 -



1
2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

IS

2C

21

%.

2c
24

21

2(

2\

21

others, some or all of the following: the
strength of plaintiffs' case; the risk 
expense, complexity, and likely duration of 
further litigation; the risk of maintaining 
class action status throughout the trial; 
the amount offered in settlement; the extent 
of discovery completed, and the stage of the 
proceedings; the experience and views of 
counsel; the presence of a governmental 
participant; and the reaction of the class 
members of the proposed settlement.

Id. In addition, the Court should "reach a reasoned judgment 
that the agreement is not the product of fraud or overreaching 
by, or collusion between, the negotiating parties." Id.

Notice

Discussion of Factors Relevant to 
Fairness of Settlement

Notice ,of the settlement was given to members of the 
class by publication in eleven major newspapers in the State of 
California, and personal notices were sent by first class mail 
to approximately 15,000 black and Hispanic employees and 
applicants for employment. Declaration of Keith C. Eyrich, Esq. 
Both the form of the notice and the manner of publication were 
previously approved by the Court.
/
/
/

6



1
2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Strength of Plaintiffs1 Case
Plaintiffs alleged that the alleged discriminatory 

employment system utilized by Vons resulted in, for example, 
statistical disparities between the proportion of minority 
persons in higher level positions filled by promotion from lower 
level jobs and the proportion of minority persons overall. 
Complaint 1f 7. Similar disparities could arguably be 
established between Vons' minority workforce and minority 
representation in the relevant labor market. Such unrebutted 
statistical showings have been found sufficient to establish a 
prima facie case of discrimination and to establish likelihood 
of success to justify the relief set forth in the Consent 
Decree. See, e,g. , Kirkland v. N.Y. State Dept, of Correc. 
Services, 711 F.2d 1117, 1131-32 (2d Cir. 1983); Reed v. General 
Motors Corp., 703 F.2d 670, 172-73 (5th Cir. 1983).

Risk, Expense, Complexity, and Likely Duration of Further 
Litigation

Litigation of employment discrimination class actions 
of the scope pleaded here requires expenditure of substantial 
time and expense, and involves complex issues of law and fact 
and risk of uncertain outcome. See Cotton v. Hinton, 559 F.2d 
1326, 1331 (5th Cir. 1977). Settlement to avoid such risk, 
expense, complexity, and duration of further litigation is not 
only salutary, but promotes the object of Title VII and other 
civil rights statutes. Reed v. General Motors Corp., 703 F.2d 
at 175.
/

7



1
2

3

4

5
6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

Risk of Maintaining Class Action Throughout the Trial
Maintenance of the broad class action alleged here is 

likely to have been closely contested in light of the Supreme 
Court's decisions in General Telephone Co. v. Falcon, 102 S.Ct. 
2364 (1982), and East Texas Motor Freight System Inc, v.
Rodriquez, 431 U.S. 395 (1977). On the other hand, Vons' 
exposure even if a partial class were maintained would have been 
considerable.

Amount Offered in Settlement
Except for the lump sum payments to two of the named 

plaintiffs, the settlement provides for no direct monetary 
relief to the class. However, the marked elevation of levels of 
black and Hispanic employment in entry level, journeyman, and 
department head positions required by the Consent Decree have 
substantial monetary value. Moreover, hiring and promotional 
relief provide the class with substantial continuing benefits. 
Settlement of the controversy provides these benefits earlier 
than a possible back pay award after years of protracted 
litigation would have.

"It is the complete package, taken as a whole, rather 
than the individual component parts, that must be examined for 
overall fairness." Officers for Justice v. Civil Service Com1n , 
688 F .2d at 628.

Extent of Discovery Completed and the Stage of the Proceedings
The case was settled immediately upon the filing of 

the Complaint and without the commencement of discovery.

8



1
2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

However, the record of EEOC proceedings was an adequate basis 
for plaintiffs' counsel to act intelligently and in an informed 
manner in framing a detailed Settlement. The EEOC record 
includes, for instance, workforce statistics by race for each of 
Vons' retail stores. See Declaration of Bill Lann Lee, attached 
hereto. Plaintiffs' counsel, of course, also had the benefit of 
the experience of named plaintiffs.

Experience and Views of Counsel
Class counsel and Vons counsel both recommend that the 

Consent Decree be approved. Class counsel include attorneys 
associated with the Center for Law in the Public Interest and 
the Mexican American Legal Defense Fund, public interest law 
firms that have substantial experience in Title VII and civil 
rights litigation. Vons is represented by eminently qualified 
employment discrimination defense counsel.

Presence of a Governmental Participant
No governmental entity is a party to these 

proceedings. The EEOC administrative proceedings did not result 
in any decision.

Reaction of Class Members
Vons identified and sent notices of the settlement to 

some 15,000 black and Hispanic applicants for employment and 
employees —  principally applicants —  and publication notice 
was given to an indefinite number. However, only -24 individuals 
(less than one-tenth of one percent at best of the group

9



1
2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

receiving personal notice) responded by letter to the Court.
Ten class members lodged "objections,"—/ all of which stated 
only that the particular individuals themselves had been denied 
employment opportunities, but articulating no other objections 
to the settlement. Six class members did state that they as 
individuals were denied employment opportunities, but did not 
denominate their letters as objections.—/ Eight others

3/submitted letters excluding themselves from the class action.—'
4/Two letters were received from non-class members.—'

In addition, plaintiffs' counsel received several 
letters from class members and non-class members, attached to 
the Declaration of Bill Lann Lee, that apparently were not sent 
to the Court.-/

Letters of Octavia Manuel Aceves, William Michael 
Archuleta, Carmen Yvette Atkins, Christina A. Duran, Danny R. 
Duran, Delia Garcia, Willie Haigler, Christopher Hill, Yolanda 
Meijia, Randy John Stevens.

— Letters of Adrienne Atkins, Boyce L. Cunningham,
Jose M. Jiminez, Cassie A. Jones, Jerry E. Henry, and Velda C. 
Veney.

3/—' Letters of Elizabeth E. Bailey, Bruce Bolden,
Cleotis M. Banks, Jose F. _____, Keith R. Hanson by James
Hanson, Orlando Marcus Martinez, Donnie L. Moultrie, and 
Christopher B. Stevenson.

One from a white woman looking for a job, and one from 
"The Asian Coalition Against Discrimination," speculating that 
Asians will be disadvantaged in employment by the goals set for 
"Mexicans."

5 /—' Two letters from class members expressed support for
the settlement (Robert Sena and LeZanda G. Thompson); one 
objected on the basis of the denial of an employment opportunity 
to the individual (Richard Dominguez). Four non-party 
individuals objected to the use of "racial quotas" (Joan and 
Michael Gonzales, J.W. Orozco, and L. Rob Werner).

10



1 Absence of Fraud or Collusion
2

3

4

5 
6 

7 

8 

9

10
11

12

13
14

15

16 

17 

18 

19 
20

2 1 1

221
23

24
25

26

27

28

There is a clear absence of fraud or collusion, and in 
fact, no one contends otherwise. The settlement is the result 
of arm's length negotiations.

CONCLUSION

For the above reasons, the Court should approve the 
Consent Decree in Full Settlement of Class Claims pursuant to 
Rule 23(e), Fed. R. Civ. Pro.

DATED: November 27, 1984
BILL LANN LEE 
MARILYN 0. TESAURO 
ELSA LEYVA
Center for Law in the 

Public Interest
JOHN HUERTA
Mexican American Legal Defense 

and Educational Fund
STANDLEY L. DORN
Overland, Berke, Wesley, Gits,

ccl24#4 11



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

2G
27

2S

HA

DECLARATION OF BILL LANN LEE

BILL LANN LEE declares that, if called to testify, he
would say:

1. I am plaintiffs' lead counsel in the above
lawsuit.

2. In conducting a factual investigation preliminary 
to filing the lawsuit, I reviewed, inter alia, the files of named 
plaintiffs Donald McTyer, Robert L. Blueford, and Joe M. Olague, 
prepared by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) 
during its administrative proceedings. Included in these files 
were standardized EEO-1 statistical reports for each of defendant 
Vons' 170-odd retail stores showing the workforce in various 
occupational categories by race and sex for 1982.

3. Attached hereto are letters from class members and 
non-class members received by plaintiffs' counsel pursuant to the 
provisions of the notice of settlement that do not appear to have 
been received by the Clerk's Office.

Executed this 27th day of November, 1984, at Los 
Angeles, California.

12



n / 3 -  / f ? y

•Vi

a/ ^  -» ^9 v« ■ i n ■ -# ̂  1 a *+0 if A  ̂   ̂  ̂ ^  ̂  i/

J&Ar+C.

* J?J<L
£ o 4 ^ tJ 7 * l M ^ ^ v̂ ca ^

Z ^ c n rt& £ J > y \t CUSUL -Z^.

^  “ 'Zqf&  <3U *>&
(/

^Utt&<l-

Y & t  &*> -^i^\J2^uU^C4T^

r-^t&C&*LA
</A. ^

M a

sfetcAj___I ^ C H ^  < £  _
*-yy>*£r̂ <€&A~d #_*^3 _

4—CCv̂ JL
. S U u u U A ^ d  "" '

___V *  C ^ r u J i u /
<T v ** . _ ^ C ^ u 2 t i ^ ^ U f r

O^u-V - _ ^ ^ » t < . _____
cfi ejr/__*£cJL dL  v ^ - ^ / *  ^ V .  -« ^ i’i&  is4/*j4L ij£i& £-^ >

r
dljuuu<ioft', _________ ______________ __________

- 13-

_______

ji£_* v  /t^



/
Richard Dominguez
879^ Holly St.
Alta Loma, CA 91701 [■; .
714 987-8515
Hispanic

The positions with respect to which I was discriminated against was: 
Foreman, Department Head openings, and Management positions.

On October 17, 1984,1 talked to Mike Moore about the possibility of 
being promoted to a management position. Mike told me my per­
sonality did not fit the structure of Von's management and I 
was not conscientious enough. When I voiced my disagreement,

• he snapped at me that "If I wasn't happy with the situation I should
look fcr another job."

The basis for my objection- I strongly object to the settlement because I 
feel the punishment incurred by Von's. is insignificant when com­
pared to the damages the minority population employed by Vons had 
to endure. I believe if this case is not settled out of court, 
evidence will unooubtly find Vons guilty of racial discrimination.

I personally have been subjected to undue harrassment and 
defamation of character on many different occasions simply because 
of my ethnic background. It is also general knowledge in my 
department (Deli), that Mexicans have little or no chance for pro­
motions. My supervisor has also made it known that because of an 
altercation he had with Mexicans at an earlier age, that he dislikes 
and doesn't trust hispanics. Mike Moore has total responsibility 
for grooming and promoting candidates for upper level positions 
from my department. Historical data on his promoting trends will 
revels that Hispanics have had no opportunity for advancement in 
the Deli distribution Department. I hold Vons directly responsible 
for. these actions because of their negligence in monitoring the 
actions of their managers.

Because this man is responsible for lowering the self-esteem 
of Hispanics in this organization, I believe the monitory punish­
ment should be much greater with more plaintives involved in re­
ceiving a share. I also believe that with respect to management 
and department head openings that promotions should include 
Hispanics at a more accelerated rate than what was proposed. I 
don't feel we should have to wait for equal opportunity when it's 
mandated by government legislation..

I would also like to see managers prohibited from making per­
sonnel decisions based on malace and ill will toward the Hispanic 
population in the future.

Case Name and Number: Donald Mctyer; Robert L. Bluefort; and Joe
M. Olague, Plaintiffs, vs. VONS GROCERY CO., a corporation, Defendant 
No. CV 84 6938 HLH (GX)

CC: Paul Grossman, Esq. Attorney for Vons; Bill Lann Lee, Esq. Attorney 
for the class; and Leonard A. Bronsan, Clerk of the Court.

/O'-/ $■- ? v

- 14-



V c w . c . . v . < ^  l A ' h fe____N\

A l o ^  Y k W

.JXtiSl̂ cve.

O  O  Q=.
'V\ \e > k ^ V  X v^jcsy^A_

___L o _ S & S , i ^
£X-TO^k- _ ----

,_QJsJlk.____

_a
_cK<v>A_

\  V  <v <£» k o t -  | \ ^

^ V * ------------ --------------------------------------------------------------" ^ V
O-X^-S^^- Â CVî fcv,-



Joan F. Gonzales 
4555 Forman Avenue 

North Hollywood, California 91602 
213-761-2578

C

October 25, 1984

Mr. Bill Lann Lee, Esq.
Attorney for the Class
Center for Law in the Public Interest
10951 W. Pico Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA. 90064
Mr. Paul Grossman, Esq.
Attorney for Vons
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker 
555 S. Flower St.
Los Angeles, CA. 90017
Gentlemen:

This is a very strenuous objection to the proposed settlement 
in the case CV 84-6938, U.S. District Court, Los Angeles.

We find that your proposed quota system is exceedingly offensive, 
both in the actual numbers you put forth, but the entire concept of 
quota hirings. "Group rights" creates invidious wrongs against the 
average citizen. Who can tell the race or ethnic background of the 
most qualified applicants for positions?

We have four children (Steve, Paula, Jana, and Michelle), and 
we don't want them to be faced with artificial barriers that companies 
and so-called "public interest" lawyers put up. As customers of Vons, 
we have not seen any degradation of service or products because Vons 
did not previously have a quota system of hiring.

Finally, we are offended that you represent only two "minority" 
groups--blacks and Hispanics (which of course don't include any 
Spaniards or Portuguese). What ever happened to all the other 
"minorities", such as Indians, Chinese, Eskimos, Japanese, Vietnamese, 
Koreans, Philippines, Pacific islanders, and so on--to say nothing of 
these other groups which are minorities in America: Germans, Swedes,
Poles, Danes, Italians, English, French, Russians, and so onl

Didn't you learn anything from the Bakke case? America does not 
want any more quota hiring systems. It discriminates against the 
free exercise of the rights of employers and employees alike.

Sincerely

- 16-



j .  w il l ia m  O rozco
2 0 2  SO U TH  BROADW AY 

LO S A N G ELES, C A LIFO R N IA  0 0 0 1 2

October 2*4, 198*4

Mr. William Lann Lee
Attorney for the Class
Center for Law in the Public Interest
10951 West Pico Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 9006*4

Mr. Paul Grossman
Attorney for Vons
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker
555 South Flower Street
Los Angeles, California 90017

Ref:
Donald McTyer, Robert 
L. Blueford, Joe M. Olague 

VS
Vons Grocery Co

Gentlemen/Mesdames:

I have before me "Notice of Pendency of Class Action Proposed 
Settlement, and Claims ProcedureV and, "Summary of Description 
of Settlement: reference above:

I am appalled to find that "quota systems" still exist in 
this great country! My parents, myself and two younger bro­
thers immigrated to this country from Mexico many years ago.
I can tell you that they (my parents) and I found a country 
that opened its arms and its opportunities to those who were 
willing to work, to study, to attempt to improve....and I can 
tell you that jin spite of a few problems, we all did succeed! 
We would have been offended had we been offered "opportunity" 
simply because we were "Hispanic'.'

Let me tell you, thinking such as you manifest is destroying 
the work ethic in this country, pride in one's self, as well 
as the competitive spirit so necessary to succeed!

May I also add that I am not alone in this opinion - by far 
most "minorities" share my views - speak to us, not to a few 
malcontents!

Sincerely,



r i
Bill Lann Lee, Esquire
Attorney for the Class
Center for Law in the Public Interest
10951 W. Pico Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90064

L J

Paul Grossman, Esquire 
Attorney for Vons 
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker 
555 S. Flower Street 
Los Angeles, CA 90017

B  CANYON COUNTRY 
27257Zi Camp Plenty Road 
Canyon Country. CA 91351 
(805) 252-9022

Re: McTyer, et al., vs. Vons Grocery Company, et al.
Case No. CV 84 6938 HLH(GX)

Dear People:

□  ENC1NO
Encino-West Center 
18075 Ventura Blvd. #214 
Encino, CA 91316 
(818) 705-0555

This letter is an objection to the proposed settle­
ment in the above referenced class action.
I believe the proposed settlement should be summarily 
rejected as against public policy. I do not believe 
the court should confirm a settlement that provides 
for racial quotas. Such a settlement would be against 
public policy and also violative of existing laws. 
Furthermore, to sanction such a settlement would be 
tantamount to allowing and requiring Vons to conduct 
tortious policies against people who are neither black 
nor hispanic.
In effect this proposal would create a specific plan 
on the part of Vons to have future employment 
practices that intentionally discriminate against 
people who are neither black nor hispanic.
For all we know, Vons could have already had in 
practice these discriminatory practices and they are 
really asking the court to sanction this improper 
conduct.
Sincerely,

□  GRANADA HILLS 
10315 Woodley Ave. #114 
(at Devonshire)
Granada Hills, CA 91344 
(818) 366-1220

□  LANCASTER
Essex House Hotel # 105 
44916 N. 10th Street West 
Lancaster, CA 93534 
(805) 948-9059

□  LOS ANGELES
1st Interstate Bank — 20th Floor 
6255 Sunset Blvd.
Hollywood, CA 90028 
(213) 462-1722

□  SIM1 VALLEY
2345 Erringer Road #200 
Simi Valley, CA 93065 
(805) 583-2027

□  THOUSAND OAKS
223 Thousand Oaks Blvd. #207A 
Thousand Oaks, CA 91360 
(805) 497-7555

LAW OFFICES OF L ROB WERNER

L. Rob Werner

□ "Pasadena
909 E. Green St. 
Pasadena, CA 91106 
(818) 795-7899

LRW:CV
cc : Carl Olson - 18-



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

1G

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, declare and say:
That I am a citizen of the United States'and a

resident of the County of Los Angeles, over the age of eighteen 
and not a party to the within action; that I work for the office 
of a member of the bar of this Court at whose direction this 
service was made;

That on November 27, 1984, I caused a true copy of 
PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF 
APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE IN FULL SETTLEMENT OF 
CLASS CLAIMS; DECLARATION OF BILL LANN LEE to be served on 
counsel for defendants by hand delivery, addressed as follows:

PAUL GROSSMAN 
ERIC H. JOSS
PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY & WALKER 
555 South Flower Street 
Twenty-Second Floor 
Los Angeles, California 90071
Executed this 27th day of November, 1984, at Los

Angeles, California.
I declaire under penalty of perjury that the foregoing 

is true and correct.