Julia Ann Briggs v. Wheeling Machine Product Co. ( 2013 )


Menu:
  •                  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    [Unpublished]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.
    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 disability-
    discrimination 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) (180-
    day 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) (§ 2000e-
    5 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-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-3702

Judges: Murphy, Smith, Colloton

Filed Date: 3/7/2013

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024