## Facts

- Columbus B. Ricks, an untenured professor at Delaware State College, was considered for tenure.
- On March 13, 1974, the College’s Board of Trustees formally voted to deny him tenure.
- Ricks pursued an internal grievance challenging the tenure denial.
- On June 26, 1974, the Board notified Ricks that, consistent with College policy, he would receive a one-year “terminal” contract expiring June 30, 1975; Ricks accepted and signed it.
- On September 12, 1974, the Board denied Ricks’s grievance.
- After a state-agency waiver, the EEOC accepted Ricks’s charge on April 28, 1975.
- Ricks later received a right-to-sue letter and filed a federal action on September 9, 1977, alleging national-origin discrimination under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981.

## Issues

1. For Title VII, whether the EEOC filing period begins when the tenure denial is made and communicated or when employment ends after a terminal contract.
2. For § 1981, whether the applicable limitations period begins at the communicated tenure denial/terminal-contract decision or at the later date employment terminates.
3. Whether a pending internal grievance process or continued employment under a terminal contract delays accrual or creates a continuing violation.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and held both the Title VII and § 1981 claims time-barred.
- The only alleged unlawful employment practice was the tenure denial; the limitations periods began when that decision was made and communicated, no later than June 26, 1974.
- The later termination at the end of the terminal contract was treated as a delayed effect of the earlier tenure decision, not a separate discriminatory act.
- The internal grievance process and continued employment did not restart or extend the filing deadlines, and the allegations did not establish a continuing violation.

## Legal Principles

- For Title VII, the charge-filing clock runs from when the alleged unlawful employment practice “occurred,” meaning when the employer’s challenged decision is made and communicated, not when later consequences are felt.
- A discrete, communicated employment decision is the operative act for accrual even if the employee remains employed for a period afterward.
- A continuing-violation theory requires more than continued effects of a past decision; continued employment and later termination implementing the earlier decision do not, without more, extend limitations.
- Internal appeals, grievance procedures, and post-decision review do not postpone accrual when the adverse decision has been finalized and communicated.
- The same accrual approach applies to § 1981 claims using the applicable limitations period: the period begins with the unfavorable employment decision that is made and communicated.

## Conclusion

The Court held that discrimination claims challenging a tenure denial accrue when the denial is finalized and communicated; the subsequent terminal year and eventual job loss are consequences that do not delay or renew Title VII or § 1981 limitations periods.


Delaware State Coll. v. Ricks, 449 U.S. 250 (1980)