Skip to main content

Bank v. Allied Jewish Federation

D. Colo.December 10, 2013No. Civil Action No. 12-cv-03274-LTB-KLMCited 5 times
Mixed ResultAllied Jewish Federation of Colorado
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Citation
4 F. Supp. 3d 1238, 2013 WL 6489997, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173028
Judge(s)
Babcock
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Discrimination

Outcome

Court granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss. Plaintiff's age discrimination claim against individual defendant Seserman under CADA was dismissed for lack of employer status and failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but her age discrimination claims under both ADEA and CADA against employer AJF were allowed to proceed.

What This Ruling Means

Bank v. Allied Jewish Federation: Court Ruling Summary

What Happened

An employee filed an age discrimination lawsuit against the Allied Jewish Federation of Colorado and one of its officials, Seserman, claiming she was treated unfairly because of her age.

What the Court Decided

The court partially dismissed the case. It removed the claims against Seserman personally, finding he wasn't the actual employer and the employee hadn't completed required complaint procedures first. However, the court allowed the discrimination claims against the organization itself to move forward under both federal and state age discrimination laws.

Why This Matters for Workers

This ruling clarifies an important distinction: you can sue your employer for age discrimination, but individual managers or officials typically cannot be sued directly in the same way. The decision also reinforces that employees must follow proper complaint procedures (like filing with government agencies) before taking legal action. Workers facing age discrimination should pursue formal complaints through official channels first, then consider a lawsuit if those don't resolve the issue. This case shows courts will protect claims against the actual employer even if some defendants get dismissed.

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

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

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.