Younis v. Pinnacle Airlines, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining “requirement that an employee exhaust administrative remedies with regard to a claim … under Title VII before bringing suit on that claim in federal court”
• applying McDonnel-Douglas to a plaintiffs claim under Title VII for termination on account of his national origin, race, and religion when plaintiff offered no direct evidence of discrimination
• “[A]llowing a Title VII action to encompass claims outside the reach of the EEOC charges would deprive the charged party of notice and would frustrate the EEOC’s investigatory and conciliatory role.”
• “As a general rule, a Title VII plaintiff cannot bring claims in a lawsuit that were not included in his EEOC charge.” (citations omitted)
• “A Title VII plaintiff may satisfy his burden of establishing such discrimination either by presenting direct evidence of discriminatory actions by the defendant or by showing the existence of circumstantial evidence that creates an inference of discrimination.”
• plaintiff’s hostile workplace claim was dismissed as unexhausted when it was not alleged in his charge of discrimination and when the complaint’s allegations of a hostile workplace exceeded the scope of his charge of discrimination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).