Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1980

Barbara L. WILLIAMS-Appellant v. WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY-Appellee

Barbara L. WILLIAMS-Appellant v. WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY-Appellee
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · Decided June 9, 1980 · Jones, Brown, Rubin
618 F.2d 1110; 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 16830; 23 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 31,014; 23 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 404 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Jack D. Warner, Theodore R. Gibson, II, Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant., Joseph Z. Fleming, Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellee.

Barbara L. WILLIAMS-Appellant v. WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY-Appellee

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision. The 4 that cite it most often are listed here.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The appellant, Barbara L. Williams, a black woman, had been an employee of the appellee, Western Electric Company, at its shop in Miami, Florida. She was discharged on May 31, 1974. On August 31, 1976, she brought an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against Western Electric asserting that the discharge was racially motivated and wrongful. She sought reinstatement, back pay, damages and other relief. Western Electric moved to dismiss on the ground that the claim was barred by the Florida Statute of Limitations. The statute provided that “An action to recover wages or overtime or damages or penalties concerning payment of wages and overtime” shall be brought within two years. Fla.Stat. § 95.11(4)(e).

The disposition of this appeal is controlled by the decision of this Court in Cutliff v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 5th Cir. 1977, 558 F.2d 803. 1 There it was held that the Florida Statute of Limitations relating to wages is applicable in actions such as this. That statute required actions to be brought within one year, the period of the statute then in force. See also Johnson v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., 5th Cir. 1974, 491 F.2d 1364. It follows therefore that the judgment of the district court should be and it is

AFFIRMED.

1

. We are aware of the prior decisions in Page v. U. S. Industries, Inc., 5th Cir. 1977, 556 F.2d 346, and Ingram v. Steven Robert Corp., 5th cir. 1977, 547 F.2d 1260. However we consider ourselves bound by the latest panel decision.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.