29 C.F.R. § 1626.6
Form of charge
A charge shall be in writing and shall name the prospective respondent and shall generally allege the discriminatory act(s). Charges received in person or by telephone shall be reduced to writing.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 43
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Humberto Trujillo v. Rockledge Furniture, 926 F.3d 395 (7th Cir. 2019).
Humberto Trujillo v. Rockledge Furniture, 926 F.3d 395 (7th Cir. 2019). “29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 . A charge also "should"-but is not required to-contain the "full name and address of the person against whom the charge is made.”
Anthony W. Bost v. Fed. Express Corp., 372 F.3d 1233 (11th Cir. 2004). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 . A charge “should contain” certain other information, including the full name, address, and telephone number of the charging party, full name and address of the employer, a clear and concise statement of the alleged unlawful discrimination including…”
Anthony Hildebrand v. Allegheny Cnty., 757 F.3d 99 (3rd Cir. 2014). “The District Court dismissed Hildebrand’s ADEA claims with prejudice, concluding that the last date of discrimination was February 18, 2011, and that the January 11, 2012 charge was therefore untimely.”
Price v. City of New York, 797 F. Supp. 2d 219 (E.D.N.Y 2011). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 . By contrast, the ADA and Title VII regulations require that “[a] charge shall be in writing and signed and shall be verified.”
Thomas Schroeder v. Copley Newspaper, D/B/A Waukegan News-Sun, an Illinois Corp., 879 F.2d 266 (7th Cir. 1989). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 ; see also 29 C.F.R. § 1626.”
Walter W. Steffen v. Meridian Life Ins. Co., & Meridian Mut. Ins. Co., 859 F.2d 534 (7th Cir. 1989). “29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 simply states that “[a] charge shall be in writing and shall name the prospective respondent and shall generally allege the discriminatory act(s).”
Tucker v. Howard Univ. Hosp., 764 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2011). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 . Here, the plaintiffs’ Intake Questionnaires name the defendant, allege that they were discriminated against based on their sex, and generally describe the discriminatory acts, including that they were “habitually sexually harassed,” by Dr.”
Robert Bihler v. The Singer Co., 710 F.2d 96 (3rd Cir. 1983). “138, 140, 141 (January 3, 1983) (to be codified at 29 C.F.R. §§ 1626.6 , 1626.8(a)); 46 Fed.”
McWhorter v. Nucor Steel Birmingham Inc., 304 F. Supp. 3d 1185 (N.D. Ala. 2018). “" 29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 . The purpose of the administrative charge is to (1) notify the employer that a charge has been filed and (2) initiate an EEOC investigation.”
Scott v. Rochester Gas & Elec., 333 F. Supp. 3d 273 (W.D.N.Y. 2018). “3 "[C]ourts commonly hold that 'checking Box 2 on the current form of the EEOC's Intake Questionnaire, which authorizes the EEOC 'to look into the discrimination' described in the form and describing that discrimination in detail in the Questionnaire .”
Glass v. IDS Fin. Servs., Inc., 778 F. Supp. 1029 (D. Minnesota 1991). “29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 (1991) (emphasis added).”
Donald E. Diez v. Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co., a Delaware Corp., 88 F.3d 672 (8th Cir. 1996). “Under 29 C.F.R. § 1626.6 : A charge shall be in writing and shall name the prospective respondent and shall generally allege the discriminatory act(s).”
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.