astoria
federal
solimino
argued
april
decided
june
respondent
solimino
filed
charge
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
eeoc
alleging
petitioner
astoria
federal
savings
loan
association
dismissed
age
violation
age
discrimination
employment
act
age
act
worksharing
agreement
eeoc
referred
claim
state
agency
responsible
claims
new
york
human
rights
law
agency
found
probable
cause
state
law
believe
terminated
account
age
decision
upheld
administrative
review
rather
appealing
decision
state
solimino
filed
federal
district
age
act
suit
grounded
factual
allegations
considered
state
proceedings
granted
astoria
motion
summary
judgment
holding
state
age
discrimination
findings
precluded
federal
litigation
claim
appeals
reversed
inferring
age
act
structure
legislative
intent
deny
preclusive
effect
state
administrative
proceedings
held
judicially
unreviewed
state
administrative
findings
preclusive
effect
age
discrimination
proceedings
federal
common
law
principles
preclusion
rules
presumed
apply
absence
legislative
intent
contrary
congress
need
state
expressly
intention
overcome
presumption
administrative
estoppel
clear
statement
requirements
appropriate
weighty
constant
values
stake
implied
legislative
repeal
implicated
atascadero
state
hosp
scanlon
eeoc
arabian
american
oil
morton
mancari
values
represented
lenient
presumption
favor
administrative
estoppel
suitability
varies
according
context
finding
estoppel
case
give
rise
implied
legislative
repeal
thus
test
presumption
application
whether
administrative
preclusion
inconsistent
congress
intent
enacting
particular
statute
university
tennessee
elliott
age
act
implies
filing
requirements
federal
courts
recognize
preclusion
state
administrative
findings
assume
possibility
federal
consideration
state
review
however
proceedings
strictly
pro
forma
employer
likely
enjoying
airtight
defense
state
administrative
findings
given
preclusive
effect
provision
claim
consideration
federal
state
proceedings
concluded
result
left
essentially
without
effect
notwithstanding
rule
statutes
read
avoid
rendering
superfluous
parts
thereof
administrative
preclusion
likewise
found
apply
respect
claims
arising
title
vii
civil
rights
act
elliott
supra
held
title
vii
provision
directing
eeoc
accord
substantial
weight
state
administrative
findings
allowed
something
less
preclusion
immaterial
age
act
lacks
similar
delimitation
since
title
vii
provision
obvious
piece
evidence
administrative
estoppel
operate
title
vii
suit
holding
also
comports
age
act
broader
scheme
enforcement
provisions
although
congress
wisdom
deciding
administrative
preclusion
relevant
determination
choice
plausible
policy
support
pp
affirmed
remanded
souter
delivered
opinion
unanimous
leonard
flamm
argued
cause
respondent
brief
joseph
gentile
amy
wax
argued
cause
pro
hac
vice
amicus
curiae
urging
affirmance
brief
solicitor
general
starr
assistant
attorney
general
gerson
deputy
solicitor
general
roberts
robert
long
donald
livingston
gwendolyn
young
reams
lamont
white
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
atlantic
legal
foundation
martin
kaufman
douglas
foster
equal
employment
advisory
council
robert
williams
douglas
mcdowell
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
affirmance
filed
new
york
state
division
human
rights
robert
abrams
attorney
general
peter
sherwood
solicitor
general
sanford
cohen
marjorie
fujiki
assistant
attorneys
general
american
association
retired
persons
cathy
justice
souter
delivered
opinion
question
presented
whether
claimants
age
discrimination
employment
act
age
act
act
stat
amended
et
collaterally
estopped
relitigate
federal
judicially
unreviewed
findings
state
administrative
agency
made
respect
age
discrimination
claim
hold
findings
preclusive
effect
federal
proceedings
respondent
angelo
solimino
worked
petitioner
astoria
federal
savings
loan
association
almost
years
age
dismissed
position
mortgage
department
less
two
weeks
later
march
filed
charge
age
discrimination
equal
employment
opportunity
commission
eeoc
worksharing
agreement
state
agency
see
cfr
eeoc
referred
matter
new
york
state
division
human
rights
responsible
preliminary
investigation
disposition
age
discrimination
cases
new
york
human
rights
law
january
hearing
parties
represented
counsel
state
agency
found
probable
cause
believe
petitioner
terminated
respondent
age
ruling
affirmed
review
abuse
discretion
state
human
rights
appeal
board
may
although
division
appeal
board
entertained
respondent
complaint
state
law
grounds
neither
party
suggests
elements
age
discrimination
claim
differ
state
federal
statutes
respondent
seek
review
board
decision
state
instead
filed
age
act
suit
district
eastern
district
new
york
grounded
factual
allegations
considered
state
administrative
proceedings
district
granted
petitioner
motion
summary
judgment
relied
heavily
decision
stillians
iowa
holding
common
law
presumption
administrative
estoppel
prevail
virtue
congress
failure
either
language
legislative
history
age
act
actually
addres
issue
ruled
accordingly
determination
state
human
rights
division
petitioner
engaged
age
discrimination
precluded
federal
litigation
claim
appeals
second
circuit
reversed
inferring
act
structure
legislative
intent
deny
preclusive
effect
state
administrative
proceedings
granted
certiorari
resolve
conflict
ruling
review
see
also
duggan
board
education
east
chicago
heights
dist
cook
county
eighth
circuit
stillians
supra
ninth
circuit
mack
south
bay
beer
distributors
long
favored
application
common
law
doctrines
collateral
estoppel
issues
res
judicata
claims
determinations
administrative
bodies
attained
finality
administrative
agency
acting
judicial
capacity
resolves
disputed
issues
fact
properly
parties
adequate
opportunity
litigate
courts
hesitated
apply
res
judicata
enforce
repose
utah
constr
mining
repose
justified
sound
obvious
principle
judicial
policy
losing
litigant
deserves
rematch
defeat
fairly
suffered
adversarial
proceedings
issue
identical
substance
one
subsequently
seeks
raise
hold
otherwise
general
matter
impose
unjustifiably
upon
already
shouldered
burdens
drain
resources
adjudicatory
system
disputes
resisting
resolution
see
parklane
hosiery
shore
principle
holds
true
resolved
issue
equally
issue
decided
administrative
agency
state
federal
see
university
tennessee
elliott
acts
judicial
capacity
courts
course
free
rein
impose
rules
preclusion
matter
policy
interpretation
statute
hand
context
question
whether
administrative
estoppel
wise
whether
intended
legislature
presumption
holds
nonetheless
congress
understood
legislate
background
common
law
adjudicatory
principles
see
briscoe
lahue
turley
thus
common
law
principle
well
established
rules
preclusion
see
parklane
hosiery
supra
laboratories
university
illinois
foundation
chicot
county
drainage
dist
baxter
state
bank
courts
may
take
given
congress
legislated
expectation
principle
apply
except
statutory
purpose
contrary
evident
isbrandtsen
johnson
interpretative
presumption
however
one
entails
requirement
clear
statement
effect
congress
must
state
precisely
intention
overcome
presumption
application
given
statutory
scheme
rules
plain
statement
strict
construction
prevail
protection
weighty
constant
values
constitutional
see
atascadero
state
hosp
scanlon
requiring
plain
statement
intention
abrogate
immunity
eleventh
amendment
otherwise
see
eeoc
arabian
american
oil
requiring
plain
statement
extraterritorial
statutory
effect
protect
unintended
clashes
laws
nations
result
international
discord
see
generally
eskridge
public
values
statutory
interpretation
traditionally
sensitive
areas
requirement
clear
statement
assures
legislature
fact
faced
intended
bring
issue
critical
matters
involved
judicial
decision
bass
similar
superior
values
harmonizing
different
statutes
constraining
judicial
discretion
interpretation
laws
prompt
kindred
rule
legislative
repeals
implication
recognized
insofar
two
statutes
capable
coexistence
absent
clearly
expressed
congressional
intention
contrary
morton
mancari
possibility
implied
repeal
cast
shadow
us
judgment
state
law
otherwise
accorded
full
faith
credit
every
within
law
usage
courts
state
face
found
state
judgments
closely
parallel
context
title
vii
civil
rights
acts
stat
amended
et
see
lorillard
pons
enjoy
preclusive
effect
federal
courts
see
kremer
chemical
constr
see
also
allen
mccurry
case
contrast
implicates
implied
repeal
inapplicable
judicially
unreviewed
findings
state
administrative
bodies
see
elliott
supra
administrative
preclusion
represent
independent
values
magnitude
constancy
justify
protection
clear
statement
rule
although
administrative
estoppel
favored
matter
general
policy
suitability
may
vary
according
specific
context
rights
stake
power
agency
relative
adequacy
agency
procedures
cf
alexander
pearson
williams
presumption
thus
properly
accorded
sway
upon
legislative
default
applying
congress
failed
expressly
impliedly
evince
intention
issue
elliott
also
dealt
title
vii
test
presumption
application
thus
framed
question
whether
common
law
rule
preclusion
consistent
congress
intent
enacting
statute
see
also
brown
felsen
restatement
second
judgments
contrast
discerned
othing
remotely
express
ing
congressional
intent
contravene
common
law
rules
preclusion
quoting
allen
mccurry
title
vii
found
implication
comprehend
purpose
direction
eeoc
accord
substantial
weight
final
findings
orders
made
state
local
authorities
proceedings
commenced
state
local
employment
discrimination
law
elliott
supra
quoting
preclude
federal
agency
preclude
federal
see
kremer
supra
duggan
accordingly
held
district
courts
substantial
weight
standard
allowed
clearly
something
less
preclusion
elliott
supra
reach
result
age
act
carries
implication
federal
courts
recognize
preclusion
state
administrative
findings
respect
age
discrimination
claims
statute
contains
express
delimitation
respect
owed
state
agency
findings
filing
requirements
make
clear
collateral
estoppel
apply
section
requires
state
age
discrimination
law
federal
age
act
complainant
must
first
pursue
claim
responsible
state
authorities
filing
federal
oscar
mayer
evans
provides
suit
may
brought
age
act
expiration
sixty
days
proceedings
commenced
state
law
unless
proceedings
earlier
terminated
deadline
filing
eeoc
likewise
refers
termination
prior
state
administrative
action
providing
applies
uch
charge
shall
filed
within
days
alleged
unlawful
practice
occurred
within
days
receipt
individual
notice
termination
proceedings
state
law
whichever
earlier
provisions
plainly
assume
possibility
federal
consideration
state
agencies
finished
yet
federal
proceedings
strictly
pro
forma
state
administrative
findings
given
preclusive
effect
goes
without
saying
complainants
succeed
state
proceedings
pursue
suit
federal
except
perhaps
state
remedy
enforcement
thought
inadequate
requirement
claimants
file
state
authorities
federal
fact
intended
screen
federal
courts
discrimination
complaints
might
settled
satisfaction
grievant
state
proceedings
oscar
mayer
supra
complainant
looks
federal
termination
state
proceedings
therefore
ordinarily
state
agency
held
case
however
employer
likely
enjoy
airtight
defense
collateral
estoppel
state
agency
determination
merits
given
preclusive
effect
cf
kremer
supra
insofar
applying
preclusion
thus
reduce
insignificance
cases
federal
consideration
might
pursued
wake
completed
proceedings
state
agencies
provision
consideration
left
essentially
without
effect
course
construe
statutes
possible
avoid
rendering
superfluous
parts
thereof
see
menasche
age
act
lacks
substantial
weight
provision
title
vii
stressed
elliott
immaterial
nothing
talismanic
language
simply
obvious
piece
evidence
administrative
res
judicata
operate
title
vii
suit
duggan
supra
indeed
ironic
section
make
difference
statute
age
act
insofar
preclusion
federal
courts
concerned
language
added
title
vii
eeoc
applying
administrative
preclusion
giving
state
administrative
decisions
much
weight
affording
little
kremer
supra
similar
provision
unnecessary
age
act
age
discrimination
claims
eeoc
accord
came
extend
level
deference
determinations
state
authorities
see
brief
et
al
amici
curiae
event
fair
say
even
without
title
vii
substantial
weight
requirement
found
administrative
preclusion
context
title
vii
also
provides
federal
action
aftermath
terminated
state
proceedings
nearly
identical
age
act
see
oscar
mayer
supra
provided
yet
support
result
thus
suffices
outweigh
lenient
presumption
favor
administrative
estoppel
holding
also
comports
broader
scheme
age
act
provisions
enforcement
administrative
findings
respect
age
discrimination
claims
federal
employees
enjoy
preclusive
effect
subsequent
judicial
litigation
see
rosenfeld
department
army
nabors
cf
chandler
roudebush
respect
title
vii
claims
since
reason
believe
federal
enforcement
agencies
less
competent
state
counterparts
anomalous
afford
deference
one
indeed
invite
capricious
anomalies
well
whether
age
discrimination
claims
investigated
first
eeoc
state
authorities
matter
complainant
control
see
cfr
whether
might
receive
day
complete
jury
see
depend
petitioner
theory
bureaucratic
chance
petitioner
reading
also
lead
disparities
state
state
depending
whether
given
jurisdiction
age
discrimination
statute
see
moreover
assumption
claimants
fare
better
federal
state
agencies
light
provision
state
proceedings
superseded
upon
commencement
federal
action
see
recognition
administrative
estoppel
induce
claimants
initiate
federal
suit
earliest
opportunity
filing
state
complaint
thereby
defeating
purpose
deferral
resolve
complaints
outside
federal
system
see
oscar
mayer
supra
finally
although
wisdom
congress
decision
according
preclusive
effect
state
agency
rulings
bearing
upon
disposition
case
choice
plausible
policy
support
although
true
duplication
effort
duplication
need
great
speak
agency
determinations
otherwise
subjected
judicial
review
reading
statute
provide
second
chance
prove
claim
even
state
administrative
findings
may
entered
evidence
trial
see
chandler
supra
also
may
well
congress
thought
state
agency
consideration
generally
inadequate
insure
full
protection
age
discrimination
employment
case
new
york
division
human
rights
ruled
respondent
merits
appeared
amicus
behalf
highlighting
shortfalls
procedures
resources
see
brief
new
york
state
division
human
rights
amicus
curiae
alternatively
denying
preclusive
effect
agency
determination
congress
eliminated
litigation
otherwise
result
state
state
case
case
whether
agency
fact
act
ed
judicial
capacity
afforded
parties
adequate
opportunity
litigate
utah
constr
justify
application
normal
rule
favor
estoppel
reasons
district
grant
petitioner
motion
summary
judgment
erroneous
grounds
stated
judgment
appeals
affirmed
case
remanded
district
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered