Skip to main content
· 10/20/2005

Shikles v. Sprint/United Management Co.

Citations

  • 426 F.3d 1304
  • 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 22530
  • 87 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 42,129
  • 96 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1156
  • 2005 WL 2671597

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that where plaintiff “failed to exhaust his administrative remedies .... the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over his claim”
  • holding that a private sector employee was required to cooperate with the EEOC in order to exhaust his administrative remedies
  • holding that a private sector em ployee was required to cooperate with the EEOC in order to exhaust his adm inistrative rem edies
  • recognizing that ADEA and Title VII require exhaustion of administrative remedies
  • recognizing that ADEA and Title VII require exhaustion of administrative remedies
  • holding exhaustion of administrative remedies “is a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit under Title VII” and ADEA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Ebel, McWilliams, Friot

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.