- 4 -
not hired. On August 1, 1989, petitioner executed a Final Claim
Form in the class action suit, challenging the February 1, 1976,
appointment of Donald B. Buchanan.3 Petitioner subsequently
became a claimant in the class action suit against State Farm.
In November of 1991, petitioner and State Farm entered into a
"Settlement Agreement and General Release" (settlement
agreement), which provided in relevant part:
1. For and in consideration of the sum of $75,000.00,
less all required payroll deductions applicable to the
period of Trainee Agency, if any, Carolyn L. Raney * * *
does hereby completely release and forever discharge * * *
[State Farm] * * * from any claim * * * or liability of any
and every kind based on any federal, state, or local law,
statute, or regulation (hereinafter "Claim") which arose
prior to the execution of this Settlement Agreement and
General Release, and which were raised, or could have been
raised in the above-captioned case, as well as any and all
Claims arising out of or relating to any alleged
discriminatory, improper, or unlawful act or omission of
State Farm in connection with any term or condition of
employment or independent contractor status or the process
of securing or attempting to secure employee or independent
contractor status including, without limitation,
recruitment, selection, hiring, job assignment, job
transfer, training, promotion, or termination, which she may
have filed or caused to be filed * * * prior to the
execution of this Settlement Agreement and General Release.
* * * * * * *
3 Before petitioner filed the Final Claim Form, on or around
Jan. 13, 1988, a Consent Decree Regarding Monetary Relief,
Instatement Relief, and Notice (consent decree) was filed in the
class action suit in which the parties to the class action suit,
inter alia, reached an agreement as to the remedy phase of the
litigation. Section A of exhibit 9 to the consent decree
provides, at par. IV.E.2.c., that "Negotiated Settlements are not
governed by the calculation rules for any of the types of damages
available under this [Consent] Decree." Petitioner alleges that
she had never seen the consent decree until she received a copy
from respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011