Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Jimmy L. Nolen v. GA-Pacific Corp., 99-2279 (2000)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 99-2279 Visitors: 43
Filed: May 25, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-2279 _ Jimmy L. Nolen, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Western v. * District of Arkansas. * Georgia Pacific Corporation, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. _ Submitted: May 22, 2000 Filed: May 25, 2000 _ Before LOKEN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. In this diversity action, Jimmy L. Nolen appeals the district court's dismissal of Nolen's wrongful-discharge suit as time-barred under th
More
                      United States Court of Appeals
                            FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
                                     ___________

                                     No. 99-2279
                                     ___________

Jimmy L. Nolen,                             *
                                            *
                    Appellant,              *   Appeal from the United States
                                            *   District Court for the Western
      v.                                    *   District of Arkansas.
                                            *
Georgia Pacific Corporation,                *        [UNPUBLISHED]
                                            *
                    Appellee.
                                     ___________

                                Submitted: May 22, 2000

                                    Filed: May 25, 2000
                                     ___________

Before LOKEN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.
                           ___________

PER CURIAM.

       In this diversity action, Jimmy L. Nolen appeals the district court's dismissal of
Nolen's wrongful-discharge suit as time-barred under the Arkansas Civil Rights Act,
Ark. Code Ann. ยง 16-123-101 to 108 (Lexis Supp. 1999). Having reviewed the record
and the parties' briefs, we agree with the district court that Nolen failed to file within
the applicable limitations period and did not present facts justifying application of
equitable tolling or equitable estoppel. We thus affirm for the reasons stated in the
district court's order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
A true copy.

      Attest:

               CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.




                              -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer