Robinson v. Cain
This text of Robinson v. Cain (Robinson v. Cain) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 21 1998 TENTH CIRCUIT PATRICK FISHER Clerk
BETESTIA ROBINSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
JUDY CAIN, The Oklahoma State No. 98-7000 Employment Commission; KATHY (D.C. No. 97-CV-472-BU) HARRIS, the Department of Human (Eastern District of Oklahoma) Resource; KARLA TURLEY, Travelers Express Company,
Defendants-Appellees.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
Before PORFILIO, KELLY, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this
appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered
submitted without oral argument.
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. Betestia Robinson appeals the dismissal on statute of limitations and procedural
grounds of her purported civil rights complaint. Our examination of the briefs and the
record indicates the district court did not err. The judgment is AFFIRMED for the
reasons stated by the district court in its order of dismissal dated December 3, 1997.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
John C. Porfilio Circuit Judge
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Robinson v. Cain, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-cain-ca10-1998.