The Human Rights Commission voted on Monday to delay a decision in a discrimination complaint by Robert Whitt against Mount Lee Drug after respondents argued the commission lacked jurisdiction because the investigator's report was issued more than two years after the complaint was filed.

The commission's agenda item for case E22-0336 began with a jurisdictional challenge from respondent counsel Dan Strader, who said, "the commission must conclude its investigation within 2 years after the complaint is filed." He urged the panel to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction.

The challenge centers on a statutory deadline the commission staff acknowledged is phrased as mandatory in the enabling statute. Commission counsel said she has researched similar situations and that the commission has at times issued decisions with a footnote when late mailings or internal errors delayed agenda placement, but she conceded the legal question is unsettled and that she needs time to research whether the commission can lawfully issue a substantive finding after a two-year lapse.

Robert Whitt, the complainant, and investigator Bob O'Shane both addressed the record at length. O'Shane told commissioners he relied on evidence including testimony in a workers'compensation proceeding and said he found factual indications that disciplinary information had been added to Whitt's personnel file after Whitt's termination. Attorney Strader disputed the investigator's reliance on fragments of a separate proceeding's transcript and said the transcript excerpts were out of context, that the investigator misidentified speakers, and that the record did not support a finding of pretext.

After discussion the commission voted to postpone a final determination so commission counsel can research the jurisdictional question and provide written guidance in advance of the February meeting. The motion to table the vote until the commission's February meeting passed on a voice vote.

The commission's action does not resolve the merits of the underlying discrimination claim, and members said parties would be notified in writing about deadlines for any further submissions before the February meeting.

The commission will revisit whether it can issue a finding given the two-year issue; if counsel concludes the commission lacks jurisdiction the typical administrative outcome is an administrative dismissal with a right-to-sue letter for the complainant, but the commission will decide and notify the parties at the February meeting.