Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND RENNISSE MCKINLEY v. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS * * * Civil No. JFM-05-1525 * Exempt from ECF * ***** MEMORANDUM Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that plaintiff failed to file a charge concerning her claim of discrimination with the EEOC until October 18, 2004, more than 300 days after the discriminatory act she alleges. The record reflects that on August 18, 2004, plaintiff had filled in and filed with the EEOC a "Charge Information Questionnaire" concerning the allege incident. The questionnaire was filed well within the 300 day period. Plaintiff provided substantial information in the questionnaire. Her only mistake, however, appears to have been that she failed to sign the last line of the form indicating that she was providing the information under penalty of perjury. It appears that if she had done so, her charge would have been timely. I am unwilling to hold, at least without the citation of more definitive authorities by defendant, that this technical mistake should prevent consideration of the merits of plaintiff's claim. Accordingly, defendant's motion to dismiss will be denied.

Date:September 20, 2005

/s/ J. Frederick Motz United States District Judge

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND RENNISSE MCKINLEY v. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS * * * Civil No. JFM-05-1525 * Exempt from ECF * ***** ORDER For the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum, it is, this 20th day of September 2005 ORDERED that defendant's motion to dismiss is denied.

/s/ J. Frederick Motz United States District Judge

2



Download McKinley v. Verizon Communications.pdf

Maryland Law