Willis v. Interocean Mgmt

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 10, 1996
Docket95-31097
StatusUnpublished

This text of Willis v. Interocean Mgmt (Willis v. Interocean Mgmt) 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
Willis v. Interocean Mgmt, (5th Cir. 1996).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

________________

No. 95-31097 Summary Calendar ________________

DIANE WILLIS,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

INTEROCEAN MANAGEMENT; ET AL,

Defendants,

and

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, represented by the Secretary of Transportation, acting through the Maritime Administrator

Defendant-Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana USDC No. 94-CV-2701-E _________________________________________________________________ July 30, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges

PER CURIAM:*

Diane Willis appeals from the dismissal of a complaint

filed under the Suits in Admiralty Act for lack of subject matter

*

Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. jurisdiction. Willis contends that the doctrine of equitable

tolling applies to toll the running of the applicable two-year

statute of limitations period. We have reviewed the record and the

parties’ briefs and AFFIRM the district court’s dismissal for

essentially the same reasons set forth by the district court.

Willis v. Interocean Management, No. 94-CV-2701-E (E.D. La. Oct.

31, 1995).

Further, the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Henderson

v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 64 USLW 4362 (1996), which

overturned this court’s reading of the Suits in Admiralty Act

requirement of “forthwith” service, United States v. Holmberg, 19

F.3d 1062 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 482 (1994), comes too

late to help Ms. Willis. The issue in the instant appeal was not

timeliness but equitable tolling, and Henderson does nothing to

undermine the district court’s denial of equitable tolling.

AFFIRMED

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Willis v. Interocean Mgmt, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willis-v-interocean-mgmt-ca5-1996.