Julia Ann Briggs v. Wheeling Machine Product Co.

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Diana E. Murphy, Lavenski R. Smith and Steven M. Colloton (UNPUBLISHED) [4012141] [12-3702]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 12-3702 ___________________________ Julia Ann Briggs, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Wheeling Machine Product Co., also known as U. S. Steel, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee. ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Pine Bluff ____________ Submitted: March 1, 2013 Filed: March 7, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before MURPHY, SMITH, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Julia Briggs appeals the district court’s1 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) preservice dismissal of her complaint asserting a claim of disability discrimination under the 1 The Honorable D.P. Marshall, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Appellate Case: 12-3702 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/07/2013 Entry ID: 4012141 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) against her former employer. Upon careful de novo review, see Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (standard of review), we agree with the district court that Briggs’s disabilitydiscrimination claim was barred. We first note that, according to Briggs’s own assertions in her complaint, she failed to file a timely charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) (180day administrative filing period under Title VII; 300-day filing period if person initially instituted state or local agency proceedings); 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a) (§ 2000e5 applies to ADA); Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp. V. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 110 (2002) (timely EEOC charge is mandatory). We further conclude that Briggs did not allege any facts indicating her untimely EEOC filing should be excused, even recognizing that she was pursuing unemployment benefits during the administrative filing period. See Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 455 U.S. 385, 393 (1982) (filing timely charge of discrimination with EEOC is subject to waiver, estoppel, and equitable tolling); Henderson v. Ford Motor Co., 403 F.3d 1026, 1033 (8th Cir. 2005) (equitable tolling is appropriate when plaintiff, despite all due diligence, is unable to obtain vital information bearing on existence of claim; EEOC filing period will not be modified on basis of equitable estoppel unless employee’s failure to timely file is result of employer’s affirmative action). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 12-3702 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/07/2013 Entry ID: 4012141

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?