29 C.F.R. § 1601.9
Form of charge
A charge shall be in writing and signed and shall be verified.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 129
cases (39 in the last 5 years), 1971–2026 · leading case: Jones v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 502 F.3d 1176 (10th Cir. 2007).
Jones v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 502 F.3d 1176 (10th Cir. 2007). “In addition to requiring that a charge be written, signed, and verified, 29 C.F.R. § 1601.9 , EEOC regulations state that a charge “should contain” particular information, id.”
Williams v. CSX Transp. Co., 643 F.3d 502 (6th Cir. 2011). “Second, "[c]harges ... shall contain such information and be in such form as the [EEOC] requires.”
Kathleen Buck v. The Hampton Twp. Sch. Dist. Lawrence C. Korchnak, Dr, 452 F.3d 256 (3rd Cir. 2006). “Pertinent EEOC regulations state that a charge “shall be in writing and shall be verified,” 29 C.F.R. § 1601.9 , and define the term “verified” as “sworn to or affirmed before a notary public, designated representative of the Commission, or other person duly authorized by law to…”
Carol Wilkerson v. Grinnell Corp., 270 F.3d 1314 (11th Cir. 2001). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1601.9 (2000). To be verified, a charge must be “sworn to or affirmed before a notary public, designated representative of the Commission, or other person duly authorized by law to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, or supported by an unsworn declaration in…”
Gad v. Kansas State Univ., 787 F.3d 1032 (10th Cir. 2015). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1601.9 . And the regulations clarify that “verified” means “sworn to or affirmed before a notary public, designated representative of the Commission, or other person duly authorized by law to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, or supported by an un-sworn…”
Price v. City of New York, 797 F. Supp. 2d 219 (E.D.N.Y 2011). “Charges received in person or by telephone shall be reduced to writing.”
Cobb v. Marshall, 481 F. Supp. 2d 1248 (M.D. Ala. 2007). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1601.9 (2007). Defendant, however, incorrectly assumes that a “verified” charge only includes a sworn charge.”
Kocian, Charlotte T. v. Getty Refining & Mktg. Co. Appeal of Charlotte Kocian, 707 F.2d 748 (3rd Cir. 1983). “29 C.F.R. § 1601.9 (1982). The timeliness of such a charge was measured by the date when it was received by the Commission.”
Alexander v. City of Greensboro, 801 F. Supp. 2d 429 (M.D.N.C. 2011). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1601.9 . Moreover, a Charge should contain (1) the name, address, and telephone number of the employee; (2) the name and address of the employer; (3) a “clear and concise statement of the facts, including pertinent dates, constituting the alleged [discrimination]”;…”
Ford-Greene v. NHS, Inc., 106 F. Supp. 3d 590 (E.D. Pa. 2015). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1601.9 . It would appear, however, that both the EEOC and PHRC accepted and served Plaintiff’s amended charge adding Defendants Paster and Maid as respondents.”
Ramirez v. Bolster & Jeffries Health Care Grp., LLC, 277 F. Supp. 3d 889 (W.D. Ky. 2017). “”); 29 C.F.R, § 1601.9 (“A charge shall be in writing and signed and shall be verified.”
Aly v. Mohegan Council, Boy Scouts of Am., 711 F.3d 34 (1st Cir. 2013). “1147 ; 29 C.F.R. §§ 1601.9 , 1601.12, 1626.6, 1626.”
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.