Case Name: Lingi ANDERSON, Appellant, v. WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-10-16
Citations: 20 F. App'x 598
Docket Number: No. 01-1818
Parties: Lingi ANDERSON, Appellant, v. WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 20
Pages: 598–599

Head Matter:
Lingi ANDERSON, Appellant, v. WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION, Appellee.
No. 01-1818.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted Oct. 4, 2001.
Filed Oct. 16, 2001.
Before McMILLIAN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Lingi Anderson appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in her lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. We have carefully reviewed the record and the parties' submissions on appeal. For the reasons stated by the district court, we conclude that Ms. Anderson's charge of discrimination was untimely filed, see Shempert v. Harwick Chem. Corp., 151 F.3d 793, 796 n. 3 (8th Cir.1998) (noting Arkansas plaintiff had 180 days to file charge with Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), cert, denied, 525 U.S. 1139, 119 S.Ct. 1028, 143 L.Ed.2d 38 (1999), and that the circumstances did not justify equitable tolling of the filing period, see Dring v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 58 F.3d 1323, 1328-29 (8th Cir.1995) (EEOC filing period should be tolled only when plaintiff is unable to obtain vital information bearing on existence of her claim; question is whether reasonable person in plaintiffs situation would have been expected to know of existence of possible unlawful discrimination); Heide-man v. PFL, Inc., 904 F.2d 1262,1266 (8th Cir.1990) ("Equitable tolling is appropriate only when the circumstances that cause a plaintiff to miss a filing deadline are out of his hands."), cert, denied, 498 U.S. 1026, 111 S.Ct. 676, 112 L.Ed.2d 668 (1991). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Beverly Stites Jones, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).