From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Townes v. Walgreens Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
Dec 17, 2018
Case No. 4:18-CV-01635-NCC (E.D. Mo. Dec. 17, 2018)

Opinion

Case No. 4:18-CV-01635-NCC

12-17-2018

VALERIE TOWNES, Plaintiff, v. WALGREENS COMPANY, Defendant


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on its own motion. Plaintiff Valerie Townes brings this employment discrimination complaint under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). She has included her right to sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) with her complaint (Doc 1-1). However, she has not included the charge of discrimination that she filed with the EEOC. For the reasons discussed below, Plaintiff will be directed to provide the Court with a copy of her EEOC charge within thirty days of the date of this order.

Discussion

In order to initiate a claim under Title VII, the ADEA, and the ADA, a plaintiff must first exhaust his or her administrative remedies. See Lindeman v. Saint Luke's Hosp. of Kansas City, 899 F.3d 603, 608 (8th Cir. 2018) (stating that under Title VII, a plaintiff must first exhaust his or her administrative remedies before filing suit in federal court); Shelton v. Boeing Co., 399 F.3d 909, 912 (8th Cir. 2005) ("Exhaustion of administrative remedies is a condition precedent to the filing of an action under the ADEA in federal court"); Moses v. Dassault Falcon Jet- Wilmington Corp., 894 F.3d 911, 919 (8th Cir. 2018) (stating that in order to assert his ADA claim, the plaintiff must have first exhausted his administrative remedies by filing a charge of discrimination with the EEOC). A plaintiff is deemed to have exhausted his or her administrative remedies only to those allegations that are set forth in the EEOC charge and those claims that are reasonably related to such allegations. See Faibisch v. Univ. of Minnesota, 304 F.3d 797, 803 (8th Cir. 2002).

Because Plaintiff has not attached her EEOC charge, the Court is unable to determine whether the allegations in her complaint are the same or reasonably related to those set forth in her EEOC charge. As such, the Court is unable to determine whether Plaintiff has exhausted her administrative remedies. Therefore, Plaintiff will be directed to submit a copy of her EEOC charge to the Court within thirty days of the date of this order.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall submit a copy of her Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge of discrimination within thirty (30) days of the date of this order.

Dated this 17th day of December, 2018.

/s/ Noelle C. Collins

NOELLE C. COLLINS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Townes v. Walgreens Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
Dec 17, 2018
Case No. 4:18-CV-01635-NCC (E.D. Mo. Dec. 17, 2018)
Case details for

Townes v. Walgreens Co.

Case Details

Full title:VALERIE TOWNES, Plaintiff, v. WALGREENS COMPANY, Defendant

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Dec 17, 2018

Citations

Case No. 4:18-CV-01635-NCC (E.D. Mo. Dec. 17, 2018)