Savoie v. Seacraft Shipyard

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Savoie v. Seacraft Shipyard

Opinion

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 00-30583 Summary Calendar

JODITH SAVOIE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

SEACRAFT SHIPYARD,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court For the Western District of Louisiana (99-CV-1872) December 29, 2000 Before DAVIS, JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jodith Savoie, a white female, was employed by Seacraft

Shipyard for approximately ten months ending April 3, 1998. Savoie

retained an attorney and on September 19, 1998, filed a charge of

discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

(“EEOC”) against Seacraft asserting that she was sexually harassed,

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. discriminated against, and discharged because of her gender. On

October 25, 1998, the EEOC issued its dismissal and notice of

rights which specifically provided that “If you decide to sue, you

must sue within 98 days from your receipt of this notice.” Savoie

did not file timely suit after receipt of the right to sue notice.

Instead, on January 19, 1999, Savoie filed a duplicate identical

charge of discrimination against Seacraft reiterating her assertion

that she was sexually harassed, discriminated against, and

discharged because of her gender. Savoie declined to participate

in an EEOC mediation of her claims and on July 30, 1999, the EEOC

issued a second dismissal and notice of right which was mailed to

Savoie. Savoie did not file her complaint against Seacraft until

October 12, 1999, almost one year after the EEOC’s issuance of its

first dismissal and notice of rights. Seacraft moved for summary

judgment which the district court granted. Savoie timely appeals.

We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the reply brief, the

record excerpts, and relevant portions of the record itself. For

the reasons stated by the district court in its memorandum ruling

filed under date of April 5, 2000, we affirm the Final Judgment

entered in favor of Seacraft under date of April 25, 2000.

AFFIRMED.

2

Reference

Status
Unpublished