Skip to main content
· 12/16/2004

Dixon v. Ashcroft

Citations

  • 392 F.3d 212
  • 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 26099
  • 85 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,826
  • 94 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1743

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a Title VII plaintiff had exhausted a retaliation claim when he alleged facts underlying the claim but failed to state that he intended to bring a retaliation claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.