Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki
| Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued November 6, 2007 Decided February 27, 2008 | |
| Full case name | Federal Express Corporation, Petitioner v. Paul Holowecki et al. |
| Docket no. | 06-1322 |
| Citations | 552 U.S. 389 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by Roberts, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Alito |
| Dissent | Thomas, joined by Scalia |
| Laws applied | |
| Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 | |
Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on February 27, 2008. The ruling provided guidance on what would constitute an adequate filing under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA).[1][2]
Background
14 employees filed suit against Federal Express Corporation (FedEx) for age discrimination in violation of the ADEA. Under the ADEA, a person may file a civil action 60 days after filing a “charge” with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).[3] One of the plaintiffs in this case, Kennedy, filed with the EEOC a Form 283 “Intake Questionnaire” and a signed affidavit more than 60 days before filing suit. The EEOC, however, did not take the usual steps after a filing to process it as a charge. FedEx argued that Kennedy failed to file a charge with the EEOC as required by the ADEA. The District Court dismissed the suit, holding that the documents did not constitute a charge. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed.[2][4][5]
Decision
In a 7–2 decision delivered by Justice Kennedy, the Court held that the plaintiff met the procedural requirements. The Court accepted the EEOC’s position that “if a filing is to be deemed a charge it must be reasonably construed as a request for the agency to take remedial action to protect the employee’s rights or otherwise settle a dispute between the employer and the employee.”[2][6][7] The Court then decided that the documents filed in this case met these requirements.[2][4][8][9]
See also
- Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 552
- Ageism
References
- ^ Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008)
- ^ a b c d "Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008)". Justia Law. Retrieved September 7, 2023.
- ^ "29 CFR § 1626.18 - Filing of private lawsuit". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved September 7, 2023.
- ^ a b "Federal Express Corporation v. Holowecki." Oyez, www.oyez.org/cases/2007/06-1322. Accessed 7 Sep. 2023.
- ^ Anderson, Mark H. (November 8, 2007). "Supreme Court Frustrated By FedEx Age Complaint". Wall Street Journal. ISSN 0099-9660. Retrieved September 8, 2023.
- ^ "Brief of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiffs-Appellants and Reversal". Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
- ^ "Supreme Court says FedEx employees can sue over age discrimination". National Law Journal. Retrieved September 8, 2023.
- ^ "ACLU Summary of the 2007 Supreme Court Term". www.aclu.org. Retrieved September 8, 2023.
- ^ "Another Win for Workers from the Supreme Court". Workplace Fairness. March 11, 2008. Retrieved September 8, 2023.
External links
- Text of Federal Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008) is available from: Cornell Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Oyez (oral argument audio)