Source: https://www.helpmyessay.com/essays/judicial-review-ledbetter-v-goodyear-28365?utm_source=hms-e&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=papers
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 08:52:39+00:00

Document:
..making each withdrawal liability payment when due under the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act 29 U.S.C. Section 1381(a)." (Nager, et al., 2006; citing Bay Area Laundry & Dry Cleaning Pension Trust Fund v. Ferbar Corp. Of Cal., Inc. 522 U.S. 192, 208 (1997). The respondent further notes that in relation to each antitrust law a new violation is constituted by each "unlawfully high priced sale" since that sale is a "separate, single act" in violation of the Sherman Act, Klehr v. a.O. Smith Corp., 521 U.S. 170, 189 (1997).
The petitioner in this case Ledbetter, states that that question is "...whether payment of an intentionally disparate wages constitutes a present violation of Title VII," and while it is unfortunate that just as in this case, a company can practice pay discrimination over so many years and in such increments that may not be conceived as discriminatory, the fact remains that there is a specific time-period requirement for filing of such claims as are made by the petitioner in this particular case.
Because the decision in the case of Bazemore v. Friday was concerned with the intentional discrimination which occurred prior to Title VII being enacted and in Ledbetter v. Goodyear, the question rests on an entirely different issue, or the issue of intentional discrimination which falls outside of the 180 time-period requirement for filing of intentional discrimination claims, Bazemore v. Friday was not found by the court to be applicable or relevant in Ledbetter v. Goodyear and it is the opinion of this writer that there would be no effective challenge to this decision and that this decision is one of a sound nature and is one that falls within the realm of case law and that no existing law supports the claim of the petitioner in this matter relating to intentional discrimination claims that were not filed in a timely manner.
Russell, Kevin K. et al. (2006) Reply Brief for the Petitioner in the case of Lilly M. Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, Inc. 14 Nov 2006.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.