Dunbar Homes, Inc. v. the Zoning Board of Adjustment

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that the requirement that a plaintiff exhaust her or his administrative remedies prior to bringing suit pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 185(a) does not affect the district court’s jurisdiction to hear the suit
• explaining that courts have “no authority to create equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirements” (quoting Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007)); but see, e.g., Boggs v. Krum Indep. Sch. Dist., 376 F. Supp. 3d 714, 720–21 & n.4 (E.D. Tex. 2019
• declining to decide whether the exhaustion of grievance procedures under a CBA “is an element of an employee’s cause of action or an employer’s affirmative defense”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).