James Houston v. Arizona State Board of Educati

Good Law
579 F. App'x 591
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 201412-15547California388 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

James Martin Houston appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action alleging federal and state law claims arising from the denial of a reciprocal teaching certification. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Lukovsky v. City & County of San Francisco, 535 F.3d 1044, 1047 (9th Cir.2008) (dismissal as barred by the applicable statute of limitations); Kahle v. Gonzales, 487 F.3d 697, 699 (9th Cir.2007) (dismissal for failure to state a claim). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Houston’s § 1983 claims as barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitations. See Ariz.Rev.Stat. § 12-542(1) (two-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions); Knox v. Davis, 260 F.3d 1009, 1012-13 (9th Cir.2001) (for § 1983 claims, federal courts apply the forum state’s personal injury statute of limitations and federal law for determining accrual; a § 1983 claim accrues when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury that forms the basis of the action).

Contrary to Houston’s contention, Houston is not entitled to equitable tolling. See Wallace v. Koto, 549 U.S. 384, 394 , 127 S.Ct.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.