Legal Opinion

Joe Kannikal v. Attorney General United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided January 20, 2015No. 14-1803PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RENDELL, Circuit Judge:

I. Introduction

The District Court dismissed Joe Kanni-kal’s suit against his former employer, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, as untimely based on the six-year statute of limitations set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2401(a). The parties initially framed their arguments assuming the applicability of this limitation but, at our urging, have addressed whether this limitation should apply. We conclude that the dismissal cannot stand, as the six-year statute of limitations contained in § 2401(a) does not apply to suits brought under Title VII, and Kannikal’s suit was timely.…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Brown v. General Services AdministrationSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Morales v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. Hormel v. HelveringSupreme Court of the United States · 1941

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Cranbury Brick Yard, LLC v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019
  2. Tulsa Airports Improvements Trust v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
  3. ALLEN-MURPHY v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIADistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2025
  4. DOE v. BRENNANDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2020
  5. Maggio v. Wisconsin Avenue Psychiatric Center, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2015

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API