Sergei Portnoy v. County of Yolo

MEMORANDUM

Sergei Portnoy appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal and state law violations arising from his detention in county jail. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo the district court’s dismissal. See Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1072 (9th Cir.2005) (Rule 12(b)(6)); Huftile v. Mic-cio-Fonseca, 410 F.3d 1136, 1138 (9th Cir.2005) (§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Portnoy’s state law claims because Port-noy failed to comply with the California Tort Claims Act. See Cal. Gov’t Code § 945.4 (claims presentment is necessary before suing public entities); id. § 950.2 (if action against public entity is barred under the chapter beginning with '§ 945, action against public employee is also barred); see also Shirk v. Vista Unified Sch. Dist., 42 Cal.4th 201 , 64 Cal.Rptr.3d 210 , 164 P.3d 630, 634 (2007) (timely claims presentation is a condition precedent to, and an element of, any claim against a public entity or its employees).

The district court properly dismissed Portnoy’s Fourth Amendment claim related to his arrest, because the issues had been…