Skip to main content
· 5/1/1986

Gary K. Mosel v. Hills Department Store, Inc.

Citations

  • 789 F.2d 251
  • 5 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 458
  • 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 24778
  • 41 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 36,487
  • 40 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1049

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that there is no additional period to file a complaint based on an EEOC right-to-sue letter to compensate for mailing time
  • affirming dismissal of complaint because the plaintiff did not file her complaint within ninety days of receiving her right to sue letter, and the plaintiff “failed to state any equitable reason for disregarding the statutory requirement”
  • “the time for filing a complaint begins to run when the plaintiff has notice of the EEOC decision”
  • “the time for filing a complaint begins to run when the plaintiff has notice of the EEOC decision”
  • in the absence of an equitable basis for tolling, “a civil suit filed even one day late is time barred and may be dismissed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Adams, Gibbons, Per Curiam, Weis

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.