Jones v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons
United States Supreme Court
541 U.S. 369, 124 S.Ct. 1836 (2004)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
The Civil Rights Act of 1866 created 42 U.S.C. § 1981, which, at the time, guaranteed the rights of all citizens to make and enforce contracts. Section 1981 did not contain a statute of limitations, but in 1987, the Supreme Court ruled that courts should apply the most appropriate statute of limitation under state law to a § 1981 claim. In 1990, Congress enacted a catchall statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1658, that established a four-year statute of limitations for all federal laws enacted after December 1, 1990. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 expanded § 1981 to include equal rights to not only formation of contracts, but also all the benefits of a contractual relationship, including rights related to termination of contracts. Jones (plaintiff) was an African American who used to work for R.R. Donnelley & Sons (Donnelley) (defendant) in Illinois. In November 1994, after Donnelley terminated Jones’s employment, Jones filed a class-action suit against Donnelley alleging a racially hostile work environment and wrongful termination. Donnelley moved for summary judgment on the ground that the most appropriate state statute of limitation applying to Jones’s claims was a two-year limitation under Illinois law and that this time period had expired. Jones claimed that the four-year limitation under § 1658 applied. The district court agreed with Jones, finding that Jones’s claims came under the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and thus § 1658 applied because the Civil Rights Act of 1991 was enacted after December 1, 1990. The court of appeals reversed. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stevens, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.