Skip to main content
· 7/25/1988

Robert Anderson v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.

Citations

  • 852 F.2d 1008
  • 11 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1200
  • 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 10330
  • 47 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 38,165
  • 47 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1463
  • 1988 WL 79779

How courts have described this case

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

  • ruling that Congress did not intend to require that every litigant make a timely filing before commencing an ADEA action in District Court
  • holding that so long as there is an indication of an allegation of class-wide discrimination, notice may serve as a basis for suit by others who are similarly situated
  • explaining that the charge is designed to afford the defendant notice of the allegations against it and to permit informal methods of conciliation by the EEOC
  • “ADEA does not ... require that [the named] plaintiffs file a routine written consent whose only purpose is to notify the court and the defendants that the plaintiffs agree to participate in the lawsuit.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cummings, Easterbrook, Ripple

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.