Unpublished Dispositionjames Nolan, Plaintiff-appellant, v. City of Mansfield, Ohio, Defendant-appellee, 841 F.2d 1126 (6th Cir. 1988)
Annotate this CaseBefore ENGEL, MERRITT and KRUPANSKY, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
Plaintiff appeals the district court's judgment dismissing his civil action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as barred by the statute of limitations. The appeal was referred to a panel pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon consideration, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a).
Plaintiff claimed that he was deprived of his property interest in his employment in violation of due process when he was terminated on September 1, 1983. The instant action was not filed until December 15, 1986.
Upon consideration, we affirm the district court's judgment for reasons stated in its order dated April 2, 1987. Rule 9(b) (5), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
