Employment — res judicata

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals

Civil

Employment — res judicata

Where the plaintiffs previously lost a Section 1983 claim against the defendants based on the same conduct, res judicata bars their Title VII claim.

“[T]he Palkas argue—without citation to authority— that as a practical matter it was impossible for them to preserve their Title VII claims because they were waiting for their right-to-sue letters from the EEOC. We have repeatedly rejected this argument. See Czarniecki, 633 F.3d at 550-51; Brzostowski v. Laidlaw Waste Sys., Inc., 49 F.3d 337, 339 (7th Cir. 1995); Herrmann, 999 F.2d at 225. We have held that a litigant in this position has at least five options to preserve his claim: (1) he can ‘ask the EEOC or its state counterpart to accelerate the administrative process,’ Herrmann, 999 F.2d at 225; (2) he can seek an agreement with his former employer ‘not to plead the “statute of limitations,” id.; (3) he can agree [with his employer] to split a single claim into two or more suits,’ id.; (4) he can delay[] the filing of [the] first suit until the last possible moment, Brzostowski, 49 F.3d at 339; or (5) he can ‘request[] that the court postpone or stay the first case’ until he receives the right-to-sue letter, id. The Palkas availed themselves of none of these options.”

Affirmed.

09-2042 & 09-3796 Palka v. City of Chicago

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Nolan, Kendall, JJ., Sykes, J.