News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Exhaustion Doctrine

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
A&O Shearman

The United States Supreme Court Unanimously Holds That Litigants Can Appeal A “Purely Legal” Issue Resolved At Summary Judgment...

A&O Shearman on

On May 25, 2023, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that a post-trial motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“FRCP”) 50(b) is not required to preserve appellate review of a purely legal issue resolved at...more

Epstein Becker & Green

A Big Day for the Little Guy – SCOTUS Today

Epstein Becker & Green on

With essential unanimity, though with an array of concurrences in one of them, the Supreme Court ruled against government parties in three cases, two of them in favor of homeowners, and in property rights and environmental...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - May 25, 2023

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued three decisions: Tyler v. Hennepin County, No. 22-166: This case involved the Fifth Amendment’s “Takings Clause” in the context of seizing property to collect unpaid...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - May 11, 2023

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued five decisions: National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, No. 21-468: This case involved a constitutional challenge to California’s “animal cruelty law” known as...more

Dickinson Wright

U.S. Supreme Court Decides Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools

Dickinson Wright on

The United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, No. 21-887, opening the door for future claims against schools for compensatory monetary damages. In its unanimous opinion, the Supreme...more

Clark Hill PLC

Supreme Court’s Recent Decision: Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools

Clark Hill PLC on

The United States Supreme Court recently issued a unanimous decision, Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools et al., which provides clarification about the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act’s (“IDEA”) exhaustion...more

Franczek P.C.

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That IDEA Exhaustion Requirements Do Not Preclude Money Damages Under The ADA

Franczek P.C. on

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in favor of a deaf student in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, 143 S. Ct. 81 (U.S. 2022), where the Court held that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) exhaustion...more

Roetzel & Andress

Supreme Court Holds Districts May Be Sued for Damages Even When IDEA Administrative Process Is Not Exhausted

Roetzel & Andress on

The Supreme Court unanimously held in Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, No. 21-887 (Mar. 21, 2023) that a student can sue for compensatory damages under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) even when they have not...more

Miller Canfield

SCOTUS: Public School Children with Disabilities Can Get Compensatory Damages

Miller Canfield on

Can public school children with disabilities sue their schools for violations of the federal antidiscrimination statutes and collect compensatory damages before exhausting their administrative remedies under the Individuals...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - March 21, 2023

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision: Perez v. Sturgis Public Schools, No. 21-887: This case considered whether a federal education law’s administrative exhaustion requirements precluded a...more

WilmerHale

Future Of Issue Exhaustion In Agency Rulemaking Challenges

WilmerHale on

Participants in administrative proceedings are routinely cautioned to raise, or "exhaust," all issues with the agency to avoid being barred from later raising those issues in court. But whether a court will require issue...more

Fisher Phillips

Supreme Court Ruling Clears Way For $350K Religious Bias Jury Award

Fisher Phillips on

Following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court several months ago allowing a former employee to pursue a religious discrimination claim, a Texas federal jury recently ordered her former employer to pay her $350,000. The...more

Laner Muchin, Ltd.

Title VII Claims Not Raised In EEOC Charge Must Be Timely Challenged

Laner Muchin, Ltd. on

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Fort Bend County v. Davis that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement is a claims-processing requirement, not a jurisdictional requirement, which means...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

Waiver Warning: SCOTUS Determines Title VII Failure to Exhaust Defense Can be Waived

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC on

A recent decision from the Supreme Court of the United States - Fort Bend County v. Davis - has sparked conversations about whether a current or former employee must file a complaint with the EEOC before suing an employer for...more

Snell & Wilmer

Fort Bend County v. Davis: SCOTUS Bends Employers' Defense to Title VII Claims, But Doesn't Break It

Snell & Wilmer on

On June 3, 2019, the United States Supreme Court ("Supreme Court") unanimously held in Fort Bend County v. Davis that federal courts may be able to hear claims brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Beltway Buzz - June 2019

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

Who’s Running USCIS? The Buzz was away last week, so we didn’t get a chance to comment on the departure of L. Francis Cissna from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). It has been reported that former Virginia...more

Williams Mullen

Failure to File EEOC Charge Does Not Automatically Bar Title VII Claims, Supreme Court Says

Williams Mullen on

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held that an employee may be able to proceed with a federal discrimination lawsuit, even if the employee has not first filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment...more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

SCOTUS rules exhaustion of administrative remedies is not jurisdictional – Does it matter?

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP on

On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement is not a jurisdictional bar to filing a lawsuit in court. The lawsuit involved an individual, Lois...more

Bricker Graydon LLP

U.S. Supreme Court limits employer defense to federal discrimination claims

Bricker Graydon LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently delivered an important decision limiting an employer’s ability to dismiss federal employment discrimination lawsuits under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In Fort Bend County v....more

Ballard Spahr LLP

Supreme Court Rules that Employers Must Timely Raise Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies in Title VII Claims or Risk Forfeiting...

Ballard Spahr LLP on

On Monday, June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Fort Bend County v. Davis, unanimously finding that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement is not jurisdictional and that employers may forfeit...more

Butler Snow LLP

The Supreme Court Concludes that Title VII’s Charge Filing Requirement is not Jurisdictional

Butler Snow LLP on

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the requirement set forth in Title VII to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that a plaintiff must first exhaust her administrative remedies with the EEOC before filing suit is...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Supreme Court Rules That Employers Can Be Forced To Defend Against Actions Under Title VII Not Properly Brought Before the EEOC

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

Resolving a circuit split regarding the jurisdictional nature of Title VII’s charge-filing requirement—the statutory requirement that an employee who alleges that he or she has been subjected to unlawful treatment is required...more

Fisher Phillips

Employers, Beware: SCOTUS Ruling Creates Title VII Litigation Trap

Fisher Phillips on

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled today that Title VII’s administrative exhaustion requirement—whereby an aggrieved employee first must file a claim with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) or a state...more

Littler

Supreme Court Holds EEOC Charge-Filing Requirement is Not Jurisdictional

Littler on

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Fort Bend County v. Davis that the requirement to file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC (or relevant state or local agency) is not a jurisdictional prescription to a...more

Benesch

Scotus Makes Defending Job Bias Claims More Difficult for Employers

Benesch on

On June 3, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed a decision of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that employers in discrimination claims can waive their right to assert that the Plaintiff failed to...more

45 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide