Legal Opinion
Barzanty v. Verizon Pennsylvania, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided January 20, 2010No. 08-1010PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
SCIRICA, Chief Judge.
Audrey Barzanty brought two claims against her employer, Verizon Pennsylvania, Inc., under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17 (“Title VTI”), alleging gender discrimination and a hostile work environment. The District Court granted Verizon’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing both claims. Bar-zanty appeals only the District Court’s dismissal of her hostile work environment claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. We will affirm.
I
Barzanty was employed by Verizon as a splicing technician…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Federal Express Corp. v. HoloweckiSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Occidental Life Insurance v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Soon Y. Park v. Howard UniversityCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
- Donald E. EARLY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BANKERS LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
- Angeline OSTAPOWICZ, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOHNSON BRONZE COMPANY, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Knaub v. TULLIDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
- CANNON v. COMMUNICATION COMPONENTS INC.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2020