Sheaffer v. County of Chatham

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the court was not bound by the EEOC’s determination that the charge was untimely
• holding that the plaintiff’s claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) filed after receiving a 20-day extension under Rule 3 were timely
• holding NIED claim based on allegations of discrimination and retaliation dismissed when no negligence alleged
• “[T]he court applies the same considerations to Plaintiff’s freedom of association allegations as to her free speech allegations.”
• “Even taking all these allegations as true, they demonstrate intentional acts for which Plaintiff has made other claims; they do not show negligent acts required for a claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress.”
• “Even taking all these allegations as true, they demonstrate intentional acts for which Plaintiff has made other claims; they do not show negligent acts required for a claim of NEID.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).