C.F.R. » Title 28 » CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › PART 42—NONDISCRIMINATION; EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY; POLICIES AND PROCEDURES › Subpart I—Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Age in Federally Assisted Programs or Activities; Implementation of the Age Discrimination Act of 1975

28 C.F.R. § 42.736

Private lawsuits

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Upon exhausting administrative remedies under the Act, a complainant may file a civil action to enjoin a violation of the Act. Administrative remedies are exhausted if—

(1) 180 days have elapsed since the complainant filed the complaint and the Department has made no finding with regard to the complaint; or

(2) The Department issues a finding, pursuant to § 42.731(g)(3), in favor of the recipient.

(b) Whenever administrative remedies are exhausted in accord with paragraph (a) of this section, the Department shall promptly inform the complainant that

(1) The complainant may bring a civil action in a United States district court for the district in which the recipient is located or transacts business;

(2) A complainant who prevails in such an action has the right to be awarded reasonable attorney's fees, if the complainant demands such an award in the complaint initiating the lawsuit;

(3) Before commencing the action, the complainant must give 30 days' notice by registered mail to the Secretary, the Attorney General, and the recipient;

(4) The notice must state the nature of the alleged violation, the relief requested, the court in which the action will be brought, and whether attorney's fees will be demanded; and

(5) The complainant may not bring an action if the same alleged violation by the recipient is the subject of a pending action in any court of the United States.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1999–2010 · leading case: Belcher v. Ohio Dep't of Human Servs., 48 F. Supp. 2d 729 (S.D. Ohio 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Belcher v. Ohio Dep't of Human Servs., 48 F. Supp. 2d 729 (S.D. Ohio 1999). · cites it 3× “Pursuant to 28 C.F.R. § 42.736 (a), a complainant must exhaust her administrative remedies prior to filing a civil action to enforce rights under § 6101, et seq.”
Parker v. Bd. of Supervisors Univ., 270 F. App'x 314 (5th Cir. 2008). “The district court’s order cites to 28 C.F.R. § 42.736 (a), which essentially sets forth the same requirements for exhaustion, but as the U.”
Paluh v. Hsbc Bank USA, 409 F. Supp. 2d 178 (W.D.N.Y. 2006). “2004) (citing 28 C.F.R. 42.736(a)). A plaintiffs failure to exhaust administrative remedies as to an ADA claim renders the district court without jurisdiction over such claims in a civil action in federal court.”
Curto v. Edmundson, 392 F.3d 502 (D.C. Cir. 2004). “See 28 C.F.R. § 42.736 (a). We also affirm the District Court’s dismissal of Curto’s Title IX claim predicated on the allegedly discriminatory assessments of the 1998 “Block I” exam, and her consequent expulsion from the veterinary program.”
Strujan v. Lehman Coll., 363 F. App'x 84 (2d Cir. 2010). “2004) (citing 28 C.F.R. 42.736(a)). Even if Appellant’s pleadings were liberally construed as raising claims under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.”
— 28 C.F.R. § 42.736(a) — 2 cases
Paluh v. Hsbc Bank USA, 409 F. Supp. 2d 178 (W.D.N.Y. 2006). “2004) (citing 28 C.F.R. 42.736(a)). A plaintiffs failure to exhaust administrative remedies as to an ADA claim renders the district court without jurisdiction over such claims in a civil action in federal court.”
Strujan v. Lehman Coll., 363 F. App'x 84 (2d Cir. 2010). “2004) (citing 28 C.F.R. 42.736(a)). Even if Appellant’s pleadings were liberally construed as raising claims under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment or the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.