Skip to main content
· 9/22/1999

Laurance A. Tewksbury v. Ottaway Newspapers

Citations

  • 192 F.3d 322
  • 9 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1345
  • 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 22969
  • 80 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1594

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that the ADA subjects ADA claims to the same administrative exhaustion requirement as Title VII claims
  • holding that an “ADA charge is subject to the time limitations set forth in Section 706(e)(1),” which details Title VII’s exhaustion and timeliness requirements
  • finding EEOC and NYSDHR charges filed at same time triggered 300-day statute of limitations
  • “New York is a deferral state under the ADEA because it has a law prohibiting age discrimination and the [New York State Division of Human Rights] is empowered to remedy it”
  • “The [state agency] has authority to remedy employment discrimination, rendering [the state] a so-called deferral state under Section 706(e)(1),” and therefore describing the state agency responsible for enforcement of the state employment discrimination laws as “a deferral-state agency”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Winter, Walker, Cabranes

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.