George FORD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BERNARD FINESON DEVELOPMENT CENTER, Defendant-Appellee
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
JACOBS, Circuit Judge:
“Title VII[ ] is a remedial scheme in which laypersons, rather than lawyers, are expected to initiate the process.” EEOC v Commercial Office Prods. Co., 486 U.S. 107, 124, 108 S.Ct. 1666, 1676, 100 L.Ed.2d 96 (1988). Layperson George Ford initiated the process under Title VII and the ADEA, alleging illegal discrimination by his employer. Under the rules governing his ease, Ford had 300 days in which to file a charge with the EEOC. Ford filed his charge on day 281 with New York State’s antidiscrimination agency, which is authorized to act as the EEOC’s agent, and asked…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Love v. Pullman Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Oscar Mayer & Co. v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by86 opinions
- Harris v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- Duplan v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2018
- McMenemy v. City of RochesterCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Morris v. Northrop Grumman Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1999
- John A. Francis v. City of MeridenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
81 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.