Lavaughn Booker v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Co., Inc.

How later courts described this case

• holding that employee’s allegation that manager is a racist is not protected activity under the ADEA because “the allegation is not that Brown & Williamson is engaging in unlawful employment practice, but that one of its employees has a racial intolerance” and that charge of “eth-nocism” is too vague to constitute opposition to an unlawful practice
• holding that “the instigation of proceedings leading to the filing of a complaint or a charge ... is a prerequisite to protection under the participation clause” and that “any activity by the employee prior to the instigation of statutory proceedings is to be considered pursuant to the opposition clause”
• holding “a vague charge of discrimination in an internal letter or memorandum is insufficient to constitute opposition to an unlawful employment practice” after noting that sending a letter to one’s employer was not filing a formal complaint of discrimination pursuant to statutory procedures
• concluding that statute should be read literally and stating that activity of employee before instigation of statutory proceedings comes under opposition clause, because the filing of a charge or complaint with the EEOC is a prerequisite to protection under participation clause

Written by the judges who cited it.