The urban dictionary gives two definitions of the phrase “hands off the merchandise”: (1) a “protest/order uttered by one of either gender when someone else (usually of the other gender) wants to indulge in a little touchy-feely but [the protester's] not in the mood”; or (2) “Basically ‘Don't touch my stuff, punk.’”

Allen Manwaring, a former grocery store manager who was fired for sexual harassment, but reincarnated as a produce vendor for the very same store, might be the rare person for whom both definitions are appropriate. And the entity ordering him to keep his hands off is the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

Pursuant to a recent ruling by that court, in EEOC v. KarenKim, Inc., the EEOC is now entitled to obtain an injunction that prohibits Manwaring not only from touching the mostly-teenage-girl cashiers who work at the grocery store but also from touching the produce or any other merchandise that would bring him physically into the store. In Manwaring's case, the fact section of the Second Circuit's opinion reveals a disturbing pattern of sexual harassment that went unchecked despite numerous complaints to the store owner.

The opinion also underlines the power – and obligation – that courts have to use equitable remedies when they are necessary to end discrimination. (Legal remedies typically consist of awards of money damages; equitable remedies typically consist of commands from a court to do, or cease doing, a certain action, although they can, confusingly in the employment context, also involve the payment of money.)

THE ALLEGATIONS IN EEOC V. KARENKIM: A ROTTEN FOOD TALE

Karen Connors owned and managed Paul's Big M Grocery, a store in Oswego, New York. In January 2001, Connors hired Allen Manwaring as the store manager. Within months, the two began an intimate relationship that produced an engagement in 2006 and a child. But during that time, Manwaring also became a great liability to Connors business-wise. According to evidence presented at trial, he repeatedly and pervasively harassed a number of female employees, most of whom were teenage girls at the time. The harassment was both verbal and physical, and it continued over a period of several years, undeterred by intermittent complaints and reprimands.