James N. Elliott v. Standard Oil Company of Texas

Fifth Circuit

James N. Elliott v. Standard Oil Company of Texas

551 F.2d 986, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 13483, 14 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 7568

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMay 9, 1977

Docket75-3710

StatusPublished

This text of 551 F.2d 986 (James N. Elliott v. Standard Oil Company of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

James N. Elliott v. Standard Oil Company of Texas, 551 F.2d 986, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 13483, 14 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 7568 (5th Cir. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff filed suit alleging racial discrimination under the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The district court dismissed a § 1981 claim on the ground that it was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 1 The case proceeded to trial on the Title VII claim. As to the discharge, the court below concluded inter alia that, “defendant discharged Plaintiff for good and sufficient reasons not connected with racial discrimination as charged in the Complaint, and it is entitled to a Judgment in this action.”

As to the claim of discrimination with respect to overtime, and disparate treatment while employed, the district court concluded that “Defendant did not discriminate against Plaintiff on the basis of race. . in terms, conditions and privileges of employment, while Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant.”

*987 After a careful and full consideration of the record, briefs and oral argument, we are not persuaded that the district court erred in these findings. These conclusions would defeat any claim under § 1981 on the merits.

The judgment is AFFIRMED.

1

. Plaintiff was terminated on November 5, 1970 and his complaint was filed on September 12, 1973, which was longer than the two years provided in the applicable Texas statute of limitations. Johnson v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., 491 F.2d 1364, 1379 n.49 (5th Cir. 1974). We find it unnecessary to determine whether the filing by plaintiff of a charge with the EEOC on December 11, 1970 tolled this limitations period. In other words, we do not decide whether Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 421 U.S. 454, 95 S.Ct. 1716, 44 L.Ed.2d 295 (1975), should be applied retroactively. See Dupree v. Hutchins Bros., 521 F.2d 236 (5th Cir. 1975).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff filed suit alleging racial discrimination under the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. The district court dismissed a § 1981 claim on the ground that it was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. 1 The case proceeded to trial on the Title VII claim. As to the discharge, the court below concluded inter alia that, “defendant discharged Plaintiff for good and sufficient reasons not connected with racial discrimination as charged in the Complaint, and it is entitled to a Judgment in this action.”

As to the claim of discrimination with respect to overtime, and disparate treatment while employed, the district court concluded that “Defendant did not discriminate against Plaintiff on the basis of race. . in terms, conditions and privileges of employment, while Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant.”

*987 After a careful and full consideration of the record, briefs and oral argument, we are not persuaded that the district court erred in these findings. These conclusions would defeat any claim under § 1981 on the merits.

The judgment is AFFIRMED.

1

. Plaintiff was terminated on November 5, 1970 and his complaint was filed on September 12, 1973, which was longer than the two years provided in the applicable Texas statute of limitations. Johnson v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., 491 F.2d 1364, 1379 n.49 (5th Cir. 1974). We find it unnecessary to determine whether the filing by plaintiff of a charge with the EEOC on December 11, 1970 tolled this limitations period. In other words, we do not decide whether Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 421 U.S. 454, 95 S.Ct. 1716, 44 L.Ed.2d 295 (1975), should be applied retroactively. See Dupree v. Hutchins Bros., 521 F.2d 236 (5th Cir. 1975).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

551 F.2d 986, 1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 13483, 14 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 7568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/james-n-elliott-v-standard-oil-company-of-texas-ca5-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack