Sujoy GUPTA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EAST TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY, Defendant-Appellee

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 could hear the unexhausted retaliation claim because it arose as a consequence of the complainant exhausting his religion and national origin discrimination claims
• holding that a district court may have ancillary jurisdiction over a claim arising out of an EEOC charge without further exhaustion if the EEOC charge is already “properly before the court”
• indicating that this rule is limited to retaliation claims due to the special nature of such claims
• holding it was, “unnecessary for a plaintiff to exhaust administrative remedies prior to urging a retaliation claim growing out of an earlier charge.”
• indicating that this rule is limited to retaliation claims due to the special nature of such claims
• creating exception for a claim involving only retaliation “growing out of an earlier charge,” not a retaliation and discrimination claim simultaneously alleged

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).