Pellot v. Triple S, Inc.

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT No. 97-1235 VANESSA PELLOT, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. TRIPLE S., INC., ET AL., Defendants, Appellees. APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO [Hon. Jose Antonio Fuste, U.S. District Judge] Before Torruella, Chief Judge, Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges. Jose R. Franco on brief for appellant. Pedro J. Manzano-Yates and Fiddler Gonzalez & Rodriguez on brief for appellees Triple S., Inc. and Juan Velazquez. Rafael Baella-Silva and Baella & Barcelo on brief for appellee Victor Correa. SEPTEMBER 9, 1997 Per Curiam. We have reviewed the record in this case and the briefs submitted by the parties. We affirm the decision of the district court, essentially for the reasons stated in its opinion dated January 30, 1997. We add only the following. Plaintiff argues the time limitation for filing an EEOC charge should have been tolled because she suffered mental or emotional disability. Even if all the facts in plaintiff's complaint are true, she has failed to allege the kind of facts which would allow a court to toll the time limitations imposed by Title VII. She does not allege she was unable to engage in rational thought and deliberate decision making. Cf. Nunnally v. MacCausland, 996 F.2d 1, 5 (1st Cir. 1993). Though she alleges she was distressed by appellee Correa's alleged harassment and her brother's legal troubles, she does not allege she was unable to function in society or comprehend her legal rights and liabilities. Id. The threshold set by Nunnally is much higher, since "federal courts have 'typically extended equitable relief only sparingly.'" Id. at 4 (quoting Irwin v. Veteran's Admin. Reg'l Office, 498 U.S. 89, 96 (1990)). Furthermore, even if appellant's alleged mental or emotional disability prevented her, for a time, from pursuing administrative remedies, she wholly failed to pursue those remedies after the alleged disability was lifted. While -2- Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 455 U.S. 385, 394 (1982) held the time limitations under Title VII are subject to equitable tolling, that rule is not a basis for "skipping entirely over the 'initial charge.'" Kizas v. Webster, 707 F.2d 524, 546 (D.C.Cir. 1983). The district court was correct to dismiss plaintiff's claim for failure to pursue administrative remedies. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. -3-