Judge rules that plaintiff waited too long to file lawsuit.
A U.S. Federal District judge has dismissed a lawsuit brought against Uniregistry and one of its former employees for sexual harassment by granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
The former employee sued (pdf) the company and one of its former employees in July 2018, claiming sexual harassment and retaliation.
But judge Josephine Staton agreed (pdf) with the defendants that her lawsuit was time-barred.
There are strict time requirements for filing such as case, including a 90-day window after the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission closes an investigation. The time limits are in place, in part, to ensure that potential witnesses to the activities are available and the parties have the best recollection of events.
In this case, some of the witnesses of the alleged harassment had left Uniregistry before Uniregistry was aware of the plaintiff’s claims.
Black Lake says
Sevan is a maniac who would frequently come into the office all coked up and have outrageous fits of rage against his team. It’s too bad she waited so long.
You dodged a bullet there, too, Franky.
Richard says
The law is the law but personally I think that this 90-day window is doing the victims of sexual harassment a disservice. Victims are sometimes ashamed and even blame themselves before they find the courage to come forward. Some of the witnesses may have left the company but that doesn’t mean that they are out of reach of a court’s subpoena. That argument just doesn’t make any sense to me.
Andrew Allemann says
I understand what you’re saying. However, in this case, the plaintiff has already decided to come forward and filed with the EEOC. The 90 day window begins when the EEOC decides to close its investigation. I think that’s why they law is written how it is.
thelegendaryjp says
Any way the exodus a couple years ago was tied to this? Sevan, Legal etc. I recall people trying to figure that out.