National Association of Government Employees v. City Public Service Board of San Antonio, Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• inferring that “district court did not believe Plaintiffs had asserted a claim under Title VI” where complaint contained only passing references to Title VI claim and did not allege essential elements
• \It is well-settled that courts have no jurisdiction to consider Title VII claims as to which the aggrieved party has not exhausted administrative remedies.\
• “Conclusory allegations unsupported by specific facts, however, will not prevent an award of summary judgment.”
• \[C]ourts have no jurisdiction to consider Title VII claims as to which the aggrieved party has not exhausted administrative remedies.\
• “ [Although the district court had discretion to grant lach-es on motion for summary judgment, it did riot have discretion to circumvent the requirements of Rule 56(c) by resolving genuinely disputed issues of fact material to laches”
• “We consider all evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).