United States District Court, Southern District of New York
June 4, 1990
ELAINE NURSE, PLAINTIFF,
CITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW YORK CITY COMPUTER SERVICE CENTER, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sweet, District Judge.
In an opinion dated March 2, 1990, 735 F. Supp. 69, the Court
dismissed plaintiff Elaine Nurse's §§ 1981, 1983 and ADEA claims.
In addition, because Nurse had been unable to produce a
right-to-sue letter issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission ("EEOC"), the Court ruled that the Title VII claim
would be dismissed as well unless Nurse could produce the letter
within twenty days of the decision. Upon the consent of
defendants, the City of New York, Nurse requested and received an
extension of time until May 21, 1990 to produce the right-to-sue
letter. By letter dated May 22, 1990, Nurse informed the Court
that no right-to-sue letter could be found and that it was now
her position that the EEOC had never issued such a letter.
Although a right-to-sue letter is not a jurisdictional
requirement, Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 455 U.S. 385,
393, 102 S.Ct. 1127, 1132, 71 L.Ed.2d 234 (1982); Hladki v.
Jeffrey's Consolidated, Ltd., 652 F. Supp. 388, 392 (E.D.N Y
1987), it is a statutory prerequisite for a Title VII action.
Despite the lack of an agency record that can confirm or deny the
issuance of a right-to-sue letter, there is no proof that Nurse
made any attempt to procure such letter as she was obliged to do
to bring her Title VII suit. It was incumbent upon Nurse to raise
the failure of the EEOC to issue a letter, if indeed there was
such a failure, prior to the commencement of her suit in federal
court and therefore there
exists no reason to toll or waive the statutory requirement.
Nurse's claims are dismissed in accordance with the March 2,
It is so ordered.
© 1992-2003 VersusLaw Inc.