Rev. David L. Joe v. Walgreens Co./ILL

413 F. App'x 928
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 18, 2011
Docket10-2656
StatusUnpublished

This text of 413 F. App'x 928 (Rev. David L. Joe v. Walgreens Co./ILL) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rev. David L. Joe v. Walgreens Co./ILL, 413 F. App'x 928 (8th Cir. 2011).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Reverend David Joe appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his action asserting both state-law and federal law employment-discrimination claims. On de novo review, we conclude that dismissal of Joe’s state-law claims was proper. See Jansen v. Lemmon Fed. Credit Union, 562 N.W.2d 122, 124 (S.D.1997). We also agree with the district court that Joe’s federal claims are time-barred, and conclude that the facts of this case do not warrant equitable tolling. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(l); 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable Roberto A. Lange, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota.

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

Related

Jansen v. Lemmon Federal Credit Union
1997 SD 44 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
413 F. App'x 928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rev-david-l-joe-v-walgreens-coill-ca8-2011.