Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Docket Number Civ. A. No. C-74-609. Motions Motion for summary judgment : Granted Motion for summary judgment : Granted Attorney(S) Ural B. Adams, Jr., Memphis, Tenn., for plaintiffs. John S. Montedonico, Memphis, Tenn., for defendant. Judges Robert Malcolm McRae Acts The Public Health And Welfare — Civil Rights — Equal Employment Opportunities — Definitions The Public Health And Welfare — Civil Rights — Generally — Equal Rights Under The Law The Public Health And Welfare — Civil Rights — Generally — Property Rights Of Citizens The Public Health And Welfare — Civil Rights — Generally — Civil Action For Deprivation Of Rights The Public Health And Welfare — Civil Rights — Generally — Conspiracy To Interfere With Civil Rights The Public Health And Welfare — Civil Rights — Generally — Action For Neglect To Prevent See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. George WEBSTER and Willie Mitchell, Individually and on behalf of all similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. LIBERTY CASH GROCERS, INC., Defendant ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT McRAE, District Judge. This is an employment discrimination action brought by George Webster and Willie Mitchell, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated against Liberty Cash Grocers pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) and 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985 and 1986. Now before this Court is the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative for Summary Judgment based on the (90) ninety day limitation period contained in the title VII statute, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1). Because the title VII statute requires that a civil action be brought within 90 days of the time an aggrieved party receives notice that conciliation efforts have failed and because the record in this case contains letters to the Plaintiffs, Webster and Mitchell, notifying them of the failure of conciliation efforts more than 90 days from the time of the filing of this action, this Court grants the Defendant's Motion for Summary judgment relying for its reasoning on the case of Mungen v. Choctaw, Inc., 402 F. Supp. 1349, 1975 (W.D.Tenn., J. McRae), which is incorporated herein. The Court further holds that the Plaintiffs' claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985 and 1986 arose more than one year prior to the filing of this complaint and are therefore barred by the applicable statute of limitations, T.C.A. § 28-304. It is therefore ordered that the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be granted and that this action be dismissed in accordance with that order.