Federal Case

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting 17 that the limitations period might be tolled where the plaintiff asserts his rights in the wrong forum
• “[T]he mere possibility that the decision might be reversed was not enough to label it advisory or ineffective for time-bar purposes.”
• “No action based on a claim of age discrimination may be brought unless the claim was properly raised with the EEOC. . . and [is] within the scope of the investigation reasonably expected to grow out of that filing.”
• oral notice sufficient to trigger running of statute of limitations despite the fact that the company’s personnel department had not yet officially voted to approve it, when the plaintiffs deposition testimony established that he knew that he was terminated after receiving oral notice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).