How this document has been cited
A discriminatory act which is not made the basis for a timely charge is the legal equivalent of a discriminatory act which occurred before the statute was passed. It may constitute relevant background evidence in a proceeding in which the status of a current practice is at issue, but separately considered, it is merely an unfortunate event in history which has no present …
- in DeSanto v. Rowan University, 2002 and 283 similar citations
—and that "[a] discriminatory act which is not made the basis for a timely charge is the legal equivalent of a discriminatory act which occurred before the statute was passed."
- in EEOC v. Peterson, Howell & Heather, Inc., 1989 and 164 similar citations
But the emphasis should not be placed on mere continuity; the critical question is whether any present violation exists.
- in Hulteen v. AT&T CORPORATION, 2006 and 120 similar citations
A discriminatory act which is not made the basis for a timely charge... may constitute relevant background evidence in a proceeding in which the status of a current practice is at issue
- in Bazile v. City of Houston, 2012 and 134 similar citations
In Evans, the plaintiff was forced to resign in 1968 because a United Air Lines policy barred female flight attendants who were married.
- in Shea v. Rice, 2005 and 43 similar citations
The Court agreed with the plaintiff that the seniority system gave "present effect to a past act of discrimination," but nonetheless found no continuing violation, stating: a challenge to a neutral system may not be predicated on the mere fact that a past event which has no present legal significance has affected the calculation of seniority credit, even if the past event might at …
- in Dunn v. Cobb County, 1991 and 62 similar citations
The timely filing of a charge of discrimination with the EEOC is a jurisdictional prerequisite to court action under Title VII.
- in Chaffin v. Rheem Mfg. Co., 1990 and 40 similar citations
For disparate-treatment claims—and others for which discriminatory intent is required—that means the plaintiff must demonstrate deliberate discrimination within the limitations period.
- in Lewis v. City of Chicago, Ill., 2010 and 36 similar citations
The Court wishes to emphasize, however, that while these dismissed claims are "the legal equivalent [s] of a discriminatory act which occurred before the statute was passed," they may nevertheless "constitute relevant evidence" of discrimination with respect to plaintiff's timely April 1976 claim.
- in De Medina v. Reinhardt, 1978 and 29 similar citations
Cited by
Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2007
498 F. 3d 1001 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2007
667 F. 2d 1074 - Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit 1981
409 F. 3d 448 - Court of Appeals, Dist. of Columbia Circuit 2005
407 F. Supp. 2d 671 - Dist. Court, ED Pennsylvania 2005
679 F. 2d 117 - Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit 1982
586 F. 2d 300 - Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit 1978
576 F. 2d 765 - Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit 1978
Dist. Court, ED California 2008
[CITATION] Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Supreme Court 2007