Tucker v. Road

Second Circuit

Tucker v. Road

538 F. App'x 100

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedOctober 31, 2013

DocketNo. 13-444-cv

StatusPublished

This text of 538 F. App'x 100 (Tucker v. Road) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tucker v. Road, 538 F. App'x 100 (2d Cir. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Kenneth Steven Tucker appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his employment discrimination action as time-barred. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), construing the complaint liberally, accepting all factual allegations in the complaint as true, and drawing all reasonable inferences in the plaintiffs favor. See Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc., 282 F.3d 147, 152 (2d Cir.2002). Here, an independent review of the record and relevant case law reveals that the district court properly dismissed Tucker’s claims as time-barred. We affirm for substantially the same reasons stated by the district court in its thorough January 4, 2013 decision.

We have considered all of Tucker’s arguments and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.

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

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Kenneth Steven Tucker appeals from the district court’s judgment dismissing his employment discrimination action as time-barred. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), construing the complaint liberally, accepting all factual allegations in the complaint as true, and drawing all reasonable inferences in the plaintiffs favor. See Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc., 282 F.3d 147, 152 (2d Cir.2002). Here, an independent review of the record and relevant case law reveals that the district court properly dismissed Tucker’s claims as time-barred. We affirm for substantially the same reasons stated by the district court in its thorough January 4, 2013 decision.

We have considered all of Tucker’s arguments and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

538 F. App'x 100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tucker-v-road-ca2-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack