©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP EEOC-INITIATED LITIGATION: 2026 EDITION | 58 KEY CASES FILED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Yellowhouse Machinery Co., Case No. 6:25-cv-344 (E.D. Okla.) The EEOC alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act concerning an employee who suffers from chronic migraines triggered by prolonged exposure to bright light. For nearly three years, the company accommodated her condition by allowing her to work under dimmed overhead lighting, enabling her to perform her job duties successfully and without issue. However, in May 2024, the store manager abruptly replaced the existing lighting with bright LED bulbs. The employee immediately experienced severe migraine symptoms and submitted a doctor’s note explaining her medical need for dimmer lighting. Despite this medical documentation and repeated accommodation requests, the employer refused to restore the prior lighting or provide any effective alternative. Instead, the company offered only to move her desk a few feet—a measure that did not alleviate her symptoms. Unable to work under the new lighting conditions and denied a reasonable accommodation, the employee was ultimately forced to resign. EEOC v. Miller’s Grill Inc., Case No. 4:25-cv-907 (E.D. Mo.) The EEOC filed a lawsuit against a Washington, Missouri restaurant alleging violations of Title VII. According to the EEOC, the restaurant’s owner subjected a female manager to repeated sexual harassment and retaliated against her when she refused his advances. The EEOC claims that the owner made crude sexual comments, asked the employee for sex, and engaged in unwanted physical contact, including grabbing her waist, touching her buttocks, and brushing against her body. He also commented on her breasts, speculated publicly that she had undergone cosmetic surgery, and stated he wanted to “smack that ass.” Actions that purportedly occurred often after the owner had been drinking. When the employee ignored the behavior and began seeking other employment, the owner allegedly retaliated by demoting her from a management position, reducing her hours, failing to pay her at the proper rate, and ultimately ceasing to schedule her for work. KEY SETTLEMENTS SECURED IN FY 2025 EEOC v. Landmark Dodge, Inc. and Landmark South, Inc., Case No. 4:22-cv-00614 (W.D. Mo.) To resolve claims involving sex discrimination and retaliation based on the employers alleged maintenance of a sex-based hiring policy that excluded women from sales positions and men from office roles, the employers agreed to pay $275,000 and abide by compliance obligations. These obligations include revising its hiring policies to eliminate sex-based restrictions and ensure equal employment opportunities for all applicants. The company is also required to provide comprehensive training to managers, supervisors, and human resources personnel on Title VII’s prohibitions against discrimination and retaliation. EEOC St. Louis District Office DISTRICT PROFILE Director: David Davis Regional Attorney: Andrea Baran Merit Cases Filed in FY 2025: 5 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Failure to Conciliate: 109 Average Days Between Failure to Conciliate & Complaint: 187 Average Days Between Determination Letter & Complaint: 353 NE KS OK MO IL St. Louis ©2026 Seyfarth Shaw LLP
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4