Johnny Watson v. Eastman Kodak Company

How courts have described this case

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

• finding in favor of a defendant on the basis that plaintiff’s Title VII and ADEA claims were not submitted within 300 days of the discriminatory incident cited in its complaint, and therefore the plaintiff’s claims were time-barred
• attempt to obtain relief under the ADEA may proceed only if administrative charge filed within 300 days of alleged unlawful employment action
• statute of limitations began to run upon notice of impending termination, despite an offer to obtain another position
• statute triggered by receipt of letter of pending termination despite implementation delay and expressed possibility that plaintiff could transfer to another division
• “The letter stated that ‘as of January 1, 1997 you are no longer in the Account Executive position.’ ”
• “As a matter of law, notice of an ‘operative decision’ of termination is not equivocal merely because it was ‘given . . . in advance of a designated date on which employment terminated.’” (alteration in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).