W.D. New York· 2/5/1998
Cooper v. Xerox Corp.
Citations
- 994 F. Supp. 429
- 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1697
- 80 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 843
- 1998 WL 61846
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that “[n]othing in these paragraphs [in the plaintiffs EEOC charge] suggests that Cooper thought he was being retaliated against or even provides any factual basis to infer an alleged retaliation”
- declining to dismiss hostile environment claim on exhaustion grounds where substantial discovery had taken place on the issue, case was three years old, and claim was pleaded in original complaint
- charge of racial discrimination does not support claim for hostile work environment or harassment
- “[MJerely checking a box, or failing to check a box does not necessarily control the scope of the charge. The more critical analysis is whether there is any explanation or description supporting a particular claim.”
- “Moreover, even if it were considered part of the charge, it is well-settled that merely checking a box, or failing to check a box does not necessarily control the scope of the charge.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Larimer
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Lumhoo v. Home Depot USA, Inc.E.D. New York· 2002-09-26· cited 37×
- Fitzgerald v. HendersonN.D. New York· 1999-03-12· cited 15×
- Ribis v. Mike Barnard Chevrolet-Cadillac, Inc.W.D. New York· 2007-01-08· cited 14×
- Jones v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ.E.D. New York· 2018-02-21· cited 13×
- Briggs v. New York State Department of TransportationN.D. New York· 2002-11-12· cited 12×
- Whitlow v. VISITING NURSE ASS'N OF WESTERN NYW.D. New York· 2005-09-01· cited 2×
- Trivedi v. NYS UNIFIED COURT SYSTEMS.D. New York· 2011-09-26
Cites
18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court· 1973-05-14· cited 38,518×
- Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court· 1982-02-24· cited 2,939×
- Carole Tomka v. The Seiler Corporation, Daniel Lucey, David Polonsky and Timothy ConroySecond Circuit· 1995-09-27· cited 1,260×
- Geneva Butts v. The City of New York Department of Housing Preservation and DevelopmentSecond Circuit· 1993-03-24· cited 554×
- Pamela Kotcher and Barbara Davis, Pamela Kotcher v. Rosa and Sullivan Appliance Center, Inc., and Herbert TrageserSecond Circuit· 1992-02-24· cited 353×
- Torres v. PisanoSecond Circuit· 1997-06-03· cited 283×
- Sharon Karibian v. Columbia University, John Borden, Defendants-Cross-Claimants-Appellees v. Mark Urban, Defendant-Cross-Defendant-AppelleeSecond Circuit· 1994-01-25· cited 277×
- Schnellbaecher v. Baskin Clothing Co.Seventh Circuit· 1989-10-05· cited 173×
- Gomes v. Avco Corp.Second Circuit· 1992-06-01· cited 136×
- Balazs v. LiebenthalFourth Circuit· 1994-08-19· cited 85×
- Doe ex rel. Doe v. Board of EducationSupreme Court· 1997-12-01· cited 84×
- Spurlock v. NynexW.D. New York· 1996-12-06· cited 37×
- Chinn v. City University of New York School of Law at Queens CollegeE.D. New York· 1997-05-21· cited 30×
- Bridges v. Eastman Kodak Co.S.D. New York· 1993-05-19· cited 27×
- McGuire v. United States Postal ServiceS.D. New York· 1990-11-02· cited 19×
- Ausfeldt v. RunyonN.D. New York· 1997-01-02· cited 18×
- McKinney v. Eastman Kodak Co.W.D. New York· 1997-08-25· cited 13×
- Danley v. Book-Of-The-Month Club, Inc.M.D. Pennsylvania· 1996-04-19· cited 12×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.