Skip to main content

Perez v. Denco Construction LLC

D. Colo.September 12, 2025No. 1:24-cv-02766
DismissedThe Kroger Company
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
710 Labor: Fair Standards
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

DiscriminationHostile Work EnvironmentWrongful Termination

Outcome

The court dismissed all of plaintiff's claims without prejudice under the Fifth Circuit's claim-splitting doctrine, finding that plaintiff improperly filed a second lawsuit with Title VII claims after failing to amend her first lawsuit (which contained only §1981 claims) before the EEOC 90-day deadline expired.

What This Ruling Means

**Worker Files Two Separate Lawsuits Over Workplace Discrimination, Court Dismisses Case** Maria Perez sued her former employer, Denco Construction LLC, claiming she faced workplace discrimination, a hostile work environment, and was wrongfully fired. However, Perez made a critical procedural error by filing two separate lawsuits instead of combining all her claims into one case. Initially, Perez filed a lawsuit with only certain discrimination claims. Later, she filed a completely separate lawsuit adding different types of discrimination claims under Title VII (federal employment law). The problem was that she missed a crucial 90-day deadline to properly add these additional claims to her original case. The court dismissed Perez's entire case, ruling that she violated legal rules against "claim-splitting" – meaning you can't break up related claims from the same workplace situation into multiple lawsuits. The dismissal was "without prejudice," which means Perez could potentially refile her case correctly. **What this means for workers:** When filing discrimination lawsuits, it's crucial to include all your related claims in one case from the start and meet all deadlines. Missing procedural deadlines or splitting claims across multiple lawsuits can result in losing your case entirely, even if you experienced real discrimination.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Discrimination casesHostile Work Environment casesWrongful Termination cases

Similar Rulings

Molton
Ohio Ct. App.Feb 2017

The trial court did not err by entering summary judgment for Appellee on Appellant's claim for workers' compensation benefits. Generally, the coming-and-going rule bars compensation of a fixed-situs employee for injuries which occur off the work premises. Neither the zone-of-employment exception or the totality-of-the-circumstances exception applies. Judgment affirmed.

Defendant Win
Con Ed v. NLRB
U.S. Supreme CourtDec 1938
Mixed Result
Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
U.S. Supreme CourtFeb 1951
Remanded
Vega
2nd CircuitSep 2015
Remanded
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church
D.C. CircuitJul 1997
Remanded
Read Full OpinionMore The Kroger Company RulingsAll Rulings

Browse Related

More rulings from ColoradoMore discrimination casesMore retail employer cases

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My RightsLearn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.