Womble v. Bhangu, 88-4580
| Decision Date | 08 February 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-4580,88-4580 |
| Citation | 864 F.2d 1212 |
| Parties | 49 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 25, 49 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 38,676 Penny WOMBLE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Pat BHANGU, Defendant-Appellant. Summary Calendar. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Samuel H. Wilkins, Cynthia C. Tyler, Jackson, Miss., for defendant-appellant.
Charles L. Culpepper, Yazoo City, Miss., for plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi.
Before GEE, WILLIAMS and HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judges.
The issue on this appeal is whether state law claims can pend from a federal one over which the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Concluding that they cannot, we remand with instructions to determine whether jurisdiction exists and to act accordingly.
Penny Womble asserts that she was sexually harassed by defendant Bhangu's unwelcome advances during the summer of 1986, when she was employed by him at a fast-food franchise operation that he owned. As a result, she maintains, she was forced to quit, whereupon, she asserts, Bhangu spread rumors that she had been discharged for mishandling funds. In short, if her allegations are true--a matter as to which of course we express no opinion--Bhangu has conducted himself toward her as a thorough-going scoundrel.
She brought a Title VII action for harassment, joining pendant state claims for libel and slander. After requesting briefing on two issues, the district court decided on the basis of the first issue--that arising from Mrs. Womble's having failed to file a Title VII charge with the EEOC before bringing suit--that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction of the action. Having done so, it declined to reach the second: whether at the relevant times Bhangu was an "employer" within the meaning of Title VII. Unless he maintained at least fifteen employees for substantial periods defined in the statute during the relevant times, he was not. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000e(b). Even so, it dismissed the action conditioned that Bhangu not plead limitations in any promptly filed state action arising from these facts, an act beyond the court's power if it lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
In holding that the failure of Mrs. Womble to exhaust administrative remedies deprived it of subject matter jurisdiction, the court erred. The Supreme Court has held that "filing a timely charge of discrimination with the EEOC is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit in federal court, but a requirement that, like a statute of limitations, is subject to waiver, estoppel, and equitable tolling." Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, 455 U.S. 385, 393, 102 S.Ct. 1127, 1132, 71 L.Ed.2d 234 (1982). Thus the holding of the court did no more than determine that her Title VII claim was barred; not that the court lacked jurisdiction of it.
It is otherwise with the second issue, however, that which the court pretermitted. If Bhangu did not meet the statutory definition of "employer," then the court did lack subject matter jurisdiction over him. Dumas v. Town of Mount Vernon, Ala., 612 F.2d 974, 979-80 (5th Cir.1980). In that event, it had no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scelsa v. City University of New York
...administrative remedies need not be exhausted for federal courts to have subject matter jurisdiction to entertain claims. Womble v. Bhangu, 864 F.2d 1212 (5th Cir.1989). However, in order for an action to be properly brought, a claim must be filed with an appropriate agency. Trevino-Barton ......
-
Nichols v. All Points Transport Corp. of Michigan
...jurisdiction to exist under the ADEA, the defendant must meet the definition of employer as set forth in the statute); Womble v. Bhangu, 864 F.2d 1212, 1213 (5th Cir.1989) (court remanded case for determination of whether company met statutory definition of "employer" under Title VII, becau......
-
Konnethu v. Harris County Hosp. Dist.
...a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit but a requirement that is subject to waiver, estoppel and equitable tolling. Womble v. Bhangu, 864 F.2d 1212, 1213 (5th Cir. 1989) (citing Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, 455 U.S. 385, 393, 102 S.Ct. 1127, 71 L.Ed.2d 234 (1982)). As Defendant has failed ......
-
Grant v. Comp Usa, Inc.
...393, 102 S.Ct. 1127, 71 L.Ed.2d 234; Temengil v. Trust Territory of Pacific Islands (9th Cir.1989) 881 F.2d 647, 654; Wamble v. Bhangu (5th Cir.1989) 864 F.2d 1212, 1213; Jackson v. Seaboard Coast Line R. Co. (11th Cir.1982) 678 F.2d 992, Regardless of the "jurisdictional" nature of the exh......
-
Family and Medical Leave Act
...entities not to be an integrated employer; district court thus lacked subject matter jurisdiction over FMLA claim); cf. Womble v. Bhangu, 864 F.2d 1212 (5th Cir. 1989) (whether defendant employed enough employees to be covered by Title VII was jurisdictional). However, the Fifth Circuit rec......
-
Family and medical leave act
...entities not to be an integrated employer; district court thus lacked subject matter jurisdiction over FMLA claim); cf. Womble v. Bhangu, 864 F.2d 1212 (5th Cir. 1989) (whether defendant employed enough employees to be covered by Title VII was jurisdictional). However, the Fifth Circuit rec......
-
Family and Medical Leave Act
...entities not to be an integrated employer; district court thus lacked subject matter jurisdiction over FMLA claim); cf. Womble v. Bhangu, 864 F.2d 1212 (5th Cir. 1989) (whether defendant employed enough employees to be covered by Title VII was jurisdictional). However, the Fifth Circuit rec......
-
Family and Medical Leave Act
...entities not to be an integrated employer; district court thus lacked subject matter jurisdiction over FMLA claim); cf. Womble v. Bhangu, 864 F.2d 1212 (5th Cir. 1989) (whether defendant employed enough employees to be covered by Title VII was jurisdictional). However, the Fifth Circuit rec......