concurring in part and concurring in the judgment.
In my opinion, the court’s disposition of the case on the merits in Part II B of the opinion makes it unnecessary to reach the question whether Topel’s claim is time-barred. In fact, the entire discussion of that issue in Part IIA is obiter dictum and I would omit it. On the merits of the non-dispositive issued that the majority has nevertheless decided to address, however, I agree that Topel’s claim was not untimely-