Court Opinion

ID: 10368
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 05:53:38+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:30:10.282521
License: Public Domain

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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under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

                                       2