Skip to main content
· 12/18/2003

Robert E. Hill v. Jack E. Potter, Postmaster General

Citations

  • 352 F.3d 1142
  • 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 25612
  • 84 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,604
  • 93 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 188
  • 2003 WL 22966239

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that a failure to cooperate with the EEOC constitutes failure to exhaust administrative remedies
  • “[L]oss of a bonus is not an adverse employment action ... where the employee is not automatically entitled to the bonus.”
  • “What is true is that a litigant is not permitted to obtain an immediate appeal of an interlocutory order by the facile expedient of dis- missing one of his claims without prejudice so that he can con- tinue with the case after the appeal is decided.”
  • “failure to exhaust is not a jurisdictional defect”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Posner, Easterbrook, Williams

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.