Joan Kearney v. Foley & Lardner

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff-Appellant Joan Brown Kearney appeals the district court’s dismissal of her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ; Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 , et seq. (“RICO”); and RICO conspiracy claims. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s dismissal of a complaint (1) for failure to state a claim, and (2) on statute of limitations grounds. Daniel v. Cnty. of Santa Barbara, 288 F.3d 375 , 380 (9th Cir.2002). We reverse and remand.

1. California’s two-year statute of limitations governing Kearney’s § 1983 claim had not run when she filed her federal action. A “tort cause of action accrues, and the statute of limitations commences to run, when the wrongful act or omission results in damages.” Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 391 , 127 S.Ct. 1091 , 166 L.Ed.2d 973 (2007) (quoting 1C Corman, Limitations of Actions § 7.4.1 (1991)). The government may not take “private property ... for public use, without just compensation.” U.S. Const, amend. V (emphasis added). This means that “no constitutional violation occurs until just compensation has been denied.” Williamson Cnty. Reg’l Planning Comm’n v. Hamilton…