Woodley v. California

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that when “the employment relationship ends . . . the reasons for allowing employees to claim a continuing discriminatory policy are removed”
• tolling statute of limitations where defendant was “fully apprised” of the plaintiffs’ claims and did not show “significant prejudice” from allowing plaintiffs to proceed
• noting defendant had not shown any significant prejudice would result should plaintiffs be allowed to proceed with ADEA claims despite filing EEOC charges beyond 180-day statutory time period
• discussing the same standard for both Title VII and the ADEA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).