No. 19-135
Pamela J. Smith v. University of Maryland, Baltimore, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: 1991-civil-rights-act 42-usc-1981 adverse-employment-action civil-rights employment mcdonongh-v-smith retaliation statute-of-limitations
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (from Petition)
1) Whether, in light of this Court's recent decision in McDonough v. Smith, 588 US __(2019) and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. §1981 should accrue at the date of the adverse employment action as opposed to the date when the adverse employment decision was communicated to the employee?
2) Whether the Fourth Circuit erred in affirming the District Court's decision dismissing Ms. Smith's 42 U.S.C. §1981 claims as time-barred?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. §1981 should accrue at the date of the adverse employment action or the date when the adverse employment decision was communicated to the employee
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-08-06
Waiver of right of respondents University of Maryland, Baltimore, et al. to respond filed.
2019-07-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 29, 2019)
Attorneys
Pam Smith
Morris Eli Fischer — Morris Fischer, LLC, Petitioner
University of Maryland, Baltimore, et al.
Lillian L. Reynolds — Maryland Office of the Attorney General, Respondent