Court Opinion

ID: 9474321
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 04:54:04.244338+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:44:01.200271
License: Public Domain

NATHANIEL R. JONES, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I agree that state law must be followed, as the language of DelCostello commands:
We stress that our holding today should not be taken as a departure from prior practice in borrowing limitations periods for federal causes of action, in labor law or elsewhere. We do not mean to suggest that federal courts should eschew use of state limitations periods anytime state law fails to provide a perfect analogy.... [Rjesort to state law remains the norm for borrowing of limitations periods.
462 U.S. at 171, 103 S.Ct. at 2294 (citation omitted). The circumstances that led the Court in DelCostello to apply federal law are not all present in a § 303 action for damages, or at least not to the same degree.
I concur in Judge Contie’s opinion because the action pleaded here by Carruthers Ready-Mix is analogous to the Tennessee common-law action for procurement of breach of contract, and the three-year limitations period applies to such common-law actions in Tennessee. See Edwards v. Travelers Insurance, 563 F.2d 105, 122-23 (6th Cir.1977). I concur reluctantly, however, because DelCostello also commands us to consider the “federal policies at stake and the practicalities of litigation,” 462 U.S. at 172, 103 S.Ct. at 2294, and to select a limitations period that is not too long or too short. Id. at 166, 103 S.Ct. at 2291 (citing Auto Workers v. Hoosier Cardinal Corp., 383 U.S. 696, 707 n. 9, 86 S.Ct. 1107, 1114 n. 9, 16 L.Ed.2d 192 (1966)). I believe a shorter limitations period would better promote federal labor policies.
Tennessee law provides a limitations period that is shorter and which could apply to a § 303 action. In addition to the common-law cause of action, Tennessee law provides a statutory cause of action for procurement of breach of contract, Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-50-109 (1984) (formerly § 47-15-113), and the one-year limitations period appears to apply to this statutory *328action. See Tenn.Code Ann. § 28-3-104; Edwards, 563 F.2d at 123 n. 1. In addition, both parties conceded in their briefs on appeal that the one-year limitations period of § 28-3-104 would be an appropriate choice for a § 303 damages action brought in Tennessee.
Despite my preference for the one-year limitations period, I cannot say that the three-year limitations period § 28-3-105 of the Tennessee Code is inapplicable; the Tennessee common-law cause of action for procurement of breach of contract does provide a close analogy to the § 303 action. Consequently, I concur in the opinion of Judge Contie. I note, however, that the state cause of action found to be analogous in this case, which arose in Tennessee, might not be the most analogous or most appropriate cause of action for borrowing a limitations period in actions that arise in other states.