Aris v. Hawaii Department of Education
670 F. App'x 565
| 9th Cir. | 2016Background
- Rebecca Aris filed Title VII claims in state court within the limitations period against the State of Hawaii Department of Education (Department).
- The Department challenged the state court’s jurisdiction based on sovereign immunity.
- Aris voluntarily dismissed the state action after the limitations period had expired and refiled in federal court the same day.
- The district court dismissed Aris’s federal suit as time-barred under Title VII.
- Aris appealed, arguing she was entitled to equitable tolling under Burnett v. New York Central Railroad Co. because her original state filing was timely.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo whether equitable tolling applied and affirmed the dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether equitable tolling applies to save Aris’s Title VII claim | Aris: Burnett-style equitable tolling should apply because she timely filed in state court and then refiled in federal court after dismissal | Dept.: No Burnett tolling; Aris has not alleged facts showing defendant waived immunity or any statutory/legislative basis for tolling | The court held Aris failed to allege facts that justify Burnett tolling and affirmed dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Burnett v. New York Cent. R. Co., 380 U.S. 424 (1965) (approved equitable tolling where plaintiff timely filed in a forum believed acceptable due to prior waivers and legislative recognition that venue defects should not bar timely claims)
- O’Donnell v. Vencor Inc., 466 F.3d 1104 (9th Cir. 2006) (standard: de novo review when underlying facts are undisputed)
- Hinton v. Pac. Enters., 5 F.3d 391 (9th Cir. 1993) (plaintiff bears burden to allege facts supporting equitable tolling)
- Baldwin Cty. Welcome Ctr. v. Brown, 466 U.S. 147 (1984) (prejudice to defendant is not an independent basis for tolling; it is considered only after a tolling justification is identified)