Opinion ID: 3023241
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Ballon’s Allegations

Text: Ballon’s allegations are similar to those made by Evans.9 Ballon applied for a 7 Evans’s challenge to that promotion denial was not considered by the District Court since it was one of the pre-November 17, 1997 events held by the District Court to be barred by the statute of limitations. 8 The letter to Congressman Menendez was later forwarded to Congressman Donald Payne (N.J.). 9 Though the legal claims of Evans and Ballon are legally identical, the underlying record in Ballon’s case is more sparse. PATH asserts that much of the evidence bearing on Ballon’s charges was housed in the World Trade Center when those buildings were destroyed in 2001. 6 number of promotions that he claimed he did not get because of racial discrimination. The District Court considered Ballon’s §§ 1981 and 1983 claims based on events occurring after November 16, 1997. The District Court considered Ballon’s Title VII claims rooted in events occurring after April 11, 1999. Under each of these time periods, Ballon described only one relevant event – the June 1999 rejection of Ballon’s application for the Train Dispatcher position. This position required that applicants take a written examination, which would be followed by an oral examination for those candidates that passed the written examination. Ballon began the process of applying for the Train Dispatcher position in May 1999 by taking the written portion of the examination. However, he was informed that he did not pass and that, consequently, he would not be eligible to take the follow-up oral examination.