Legal Opinion
Andrew Bartlik v. United States Department of Labor and Tennessee Valley Authority
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided August 11, 1995No. 93-3616, 93-3834PublishedCited by 86 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BOYCE F. MARTIN, Jr., Circuit Judge.
This case presents for our resolution the question of how to conceptualize the effect of Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26(a), and by analogy, the effect of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(a), in determining the end of a statute of limitations period. In some of our prior cases, we have conceptualized Civil Rule 6(a) as “expanding” or “extending” a statute of limitations period. Today, we decide that Appellate Rule 26(a) and Civil Rule 6(a) do not operate to “expand” a limitations period, but merely provide a method of computing time. More…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Hubbard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- United States v. Larry BrownCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Union National Bank v. LambSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by86 opinions
- United States v. Miami University Ohio State University, the Chronicle of Higher Education, InterveningCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- Walker v. BainCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2001
- Johnson v. RiddleCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2002
- Michael Scott v. First S. Nat'l BankCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019
- Gibson v. Gibson (In Re Gibson)Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Sixth Circuit · 1998
81 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.