Setevage v. Homeland Security
3:08-cv-01645
D. Conn.Mar 29, 2012Background
- Plaintiff Setevage, age 54 at filing, applied for a federal air marshal position in Nov 2005 and received a conditional offer in Jan 2006.
- Panel interview occurred Jun 22, 2006 with a score of 48/63, indicating a “recommended” ranking.
- Quality Review Board later determined Plaintiff would not be hired.
- Plaintiff received a BQA letter on Oct 19, 2006, indicating he was not selected; vacancy closed Jun 29, 2007, prompting awareness of non-selection.
- Plaintiff initiated informal EEO counseling Dec 2007, filed an EEOC intent to sue Feb 6, 2008, but did not file a formal EEOC complaint; suit filed Oct 28, 2008 in district court.
- Court granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, determining failure to exhaust administrative remedies and lack of equitable tolling foreclosed ADEA claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exhaustion of administrative remedies under ADEA | Setevage attempted direct action after notifying EEOC of intent to sue | Failure to file a timely EEOC notice to sue or a formal EEOC complaint bars action | ADEA claim must be dismissed for lack of exhaustion |
| Timeliness of notice to sue under ADEA | Equitable tolling may apply due to alleged misleading conduct by defendants | Even with tolling, notice was untimely; filed after 180-day period | Notice of intent to sue untimely; tolling not warranted |
| Equitable tolling applicability to ADEA claims | Defendant misled plaintiff, warranting tolling | Exceptionally rare; plaintiff failed to show extraordinary prevented action | Equitable tolling not established; ADEA claim dismissed |
| Proper named defendants and scope of summary judgment | (Not argued in depth in decision; focus on exhaustion) | Some defendants improperly named; but dispositive issue is exhaustion | Summary judgment granted on exhaustion grounds; addressability of named parties deemed unnecessary |
Key Cases Cited
- Stevens v. Dep’t of the Treasury, 500 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1991) (exhaustion prerequisites for federal-age discrimination claims)
- Wrenn v. Secretary, Dept. of Veterans Affairs, 918 F.2d 1073 (2d Cir. 1991) (two routes: EEOC formal complaint or direct court action with timely notice)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (U.S. 1986) (summary judgment burden on movant to show no genuine dispute)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (U.S. 1986) (genuine disputes require evidence capable of jury verdict)
- Zerilli-Edelglass v. N.Y. City Transit Authority, 333 F.3d 74 (2d Cir. 2003) (equitable tolling limited to rare, extraordinary circumstances)
- Paneccasi v. Unisource Worldwide, Inc., 532 F.3d 101 (2d Cir. 2008) (equitable tolling applies in rare circumstances)