Frederick v. JetBlue Airways Corp.
16-1373-cv
| 2d Cir. | Nov 22, 2016Background
- Plaintiff Elsa Frederick sued JetBlue alleging race and age discrimination under Title VII and the ADEA, and corresponding New York State and City human rights laws.
- Frederick filed an EEOC charge and received a dismissal notice; she later received a second (subsequent) EEOC dismissal notice.
- Frederick filed her federal complaint after the 90-day deadline measured from the first EEOC dismissal notice.
- District Court dismissed Frederick’s Title VII and ADEA claims as untimely and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state and city claims, dismissing them without prejudice.
- Frederick appealed, arguing the federal claims were timely or equitably tolled and that the District Court should have retained supplemental jurisdiction over her NYSHRL and NYCHRL claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of Title VII/ADEA claims | Frederick argued she reasonably relied on the EEOC notices and the claims were timely or tolled due to ambiguity about mailing/date. | JetBlue argued the complaint was filed after the 90-day deadline from the first dismissal and is untimely. | Claims untimely; dismissal affirmed. |
| Equitable tolling available | Frederick argued extraordinary circumstances (ambiguous/missing mailing date) justify tolling. | JetBlue argued no extraordinary circumstances and Frederick was not diligently pursuing her rights. | Equitable tolling denied: Frederick failed both diligence and extraordinary-circumstances prongs. |
| Interpretation of EEOC dismissal notice | Frederick argued the first notice’s lack of explicit mailing date caused confusion about which 90-day period applied. | JetBlue noted the first notice stated the 90-day deadline from receipt and was enclosed in a dated EEOC letter. | Court held notice was clear and dated letter gave sufficient notice; no reasonable misunderstanding. |
| Supplemental jurisdiction over state/city claims | Frederick urged the court to keep NYSHRL and NYCHRL claims. | JetBlue argued the federal claims’ dismissal warranted dismissal of pendent state claims. | Court declined supplemental jurisdiction and dismissed state and city claims without prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sherlock v. Montefiore Med. Ctr., 84 F.3d 522 (2d Cir.) (timeliness measured from EEOC dismissal notice)
- Zerilli-Edelglass v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth., 333 F.3d 74 (2d Cir.) (equitable tolling requires diligence and extraordinary circumstances)
- Menominee Indian Tribe of Wis. v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 750 (U.S. 2016) (extraordinary and beyond control required for equitable tolling)
- Kolari v. New York–Presbyterian Hosp., 455 F.3d 118 (2d Cir.) (district court discretion to decline supplemental jurisdiction when federal claims are dismissed)