Home/Sixth Circuit/Rosemary Bargo v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc.

Rosemary Bargo v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc.

842 F.2d 330, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3592, 1988 WL 25051
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedMarch 22, 1988
Docket87-5779
StatusUnpublished

This text of 842 F.2d 330 (Rosemary Bargo v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rosemary Bargo v. The Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, Inc., 842 F.2d 330, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3592, 1988 WL 25051 (6th Cir. 1988).

Opinion

842 F.2d 330

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Rosemary BARGO, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
The GREAT ATLANTIC AND PACIFIC TEA COMPANY, INC., et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.

No. 87-5779.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

March 22, 1988.

Before ENGEL, MERRITT and KRUPANSKY, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

This appeal has been referred to this panel pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the record and briefs, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

Upon consideration, we affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons stated in its order granting summary judgment for defendants entered June 9, 1987. Plaintiff's filing of related NLRB charges did not operate to toll the limitations period applicable to this action. McCreedy v. Local Union No. 971, UAW, 809 F.2d 1232, 1236 (6th Cir.1987); Adkins v. Local 801, Int'l Union of Elec. Radio & Mach. Workers, 769 F.2d 330, 335-36 (6th Cir.1985).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 9(b)(5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

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

Related

John J. Adkins, (83-3392, 83-3416), Cross v. International Union of Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers, Afl-Cio-Clc Local 801, International Union of Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers, Afl-Cio-Clc, General Motors Corporation, Cross-Appellant. Association of Frigidaire Model Makers, (83-3754, 83-3793), Plaintiffs- Cross-Appellees v. International Union of Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers, Afl-Cio-Clc Local 801, International Union of Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers, Afl-Cio-Clc, General Motors Corporation, Cross-Appellant. Former Frigidaire Employees Association, (83-3820), Plaintiffs v. Local 801, International Union of Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers, Afl-Cio- Clc
769 F.2d 330 (Sixth Circuit, 1985)
McCreedy v. Local Union No. 971 UAW
809 F.2d 1232 (Sixth Circuit, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
842 F.2d 330, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 3592, 1988 WL 25051, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosemary-bargo-v-the-great-atlantic-and-pacific-tea-company-inc-ca6-1988.