Opinion
No. 03 C 6576
December 2, 2003
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Pepsi-Cola General Bottlers, Inc. ("Pepsi," incorrectly sued as PepsiAmericas, Inc.) has filed its Answer to the Complaint in Intervention filed by its ex-employee Renaee Henry ("Henry"). Although for the most part the Answer is unexceptionable, this memorandum order is issued sua sponte to correct one aspect of Pepsi's response.
In part Answer ¶ 4 (which responds to Henry's allegations as to her having filed a September 20, 2002 Charge of Discrimination with the Illinois Department of Human Rights and EEOC, her Complaint Ex. A) states:
Defendant further denies that Plaintiff's charge is timely.
But the Charge expressly sets out alleged acts of discrimination and retaliation that took place during the year 2002, all of which are plainly within the 300-day statutory provision. And that being so, both the Charge and Henry's Complaint are timely (at least to that extent). Accordingly the above-quoted sentence is stricken from Pepsi's Answer.
This Court expresses no view as to whether the second and third sentences of the Charge, which appear to refer to matters outside of the 300-day period, are or are not potentially actionable against Pepsi on some theory.