Opinion ID: 2007768
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: provisions of the missouri human rights act

Text: It is helpful to briefly set out certain pertinent provisions of the MHRA as they relate to the issuance of a probable cause letter and the right to file suit. A person who claims to have been subjected to an unlawful discriminatory practice may, within 180 days of the alleged discrimination, file a complaint with the MCHR, providing details of the alleged discriminatory conduct and such other information as the MCHR may need. Sec. 213.075.1. The MHRA provides that [t]he executive director shall, with the assistance of the commission's staff, promptly investigate the complaint. Sec. 213.075.3. The statute further specifically requires that [t]he investigation, [and] determination of probable cause ... shall be conducted according to such rules, regulations and guidelines as the commission shall prescribe. Id. The MCHR accordingly adopted regulations providing that the investigation and probable cause determination will be: accomplished by methods including, but not limited to, fact-finding conferences, personal interviews, written interrogatories, tests, requests for production of documents, books or papers, or other materials and reviews of investigations of other civil rights agencies. 8 CSR 60-2.025(9). Under the MHRA, if the MCHR has not completed its administrative processing of the complaint and issued its determination within 180 days, the complainant may request it to issue a right to sue letter. Sec. 213.111.1. If the letter is timely requested, the MCHR must provide it. Id. The complainant must file any civil action against the person or entity allegedly committing the discrimination within 90 days of the date of the MCHR's letter, but in no event later than two years after the alleged discrimination occurred or was discovered. Id. [2] Once a complainant is provided with a right to sue letter, the MCHR is precluded from further pursuing that complaint. Id. If no right to sue letter is requested, the executive director must continue investigating the complaint to determine whether probable cause exists to find discrimination. If, after investigation, the executive director determines that probable cause exists for crediting the allegations of the complaint, the statute requires the executive director to use various means to attempt to immediately eliminate the unlawful discriminatory practice. Sec. 213.075.3. Ultimately, if conciliation fails, the MCHR chooses whether to set the matter for hearing and determination. If it does so, its ruling may be reviewed as a contested case pursuant to sections 213.085 and 536.100. [3] If the executive director finds no probable cause, then the complaint is closed and the complainant can proceed no further. Although the statute does not directly address whether or how the executive director's no probable cause determination can be reviewed, agency regulations have, since 1988, provided for judicial review, stating: Any person aggrieved by dismissal of a complaint may obtain judicial review by filing a petition in the circuit court of the county of proper venue within thirty (30) days after the mailing or delivery of the notice of dismissal. Judicial review shall be in the manner provided by Chapter 536, RSMo for noncontested cases. 8 CSR 60-2.025(7)(E). The no probable cause letter received by Ms. Martin-Erb informed her that her complaint was closed upon a finding of no probable cause and that she had a right to seek judicial review within 30 days. She filed her petition for review in conformity with these provisions.