Raymond Baldhosky v. v. Sanchez

MEMORANDUM

Raymond Baldhosky, a former California state, prisoner, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s dismissal on the basis of the applicable statute of limitations, Johnson v. Lucent Techs. Inc., 653 F.3d 1000, 1005 (9th Cir. 2011), and we vacate and remand.

Baldhosky’s action would be barred by the statute of limitations absent equitable tolling. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 335.1 , 352.1(a) (two-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims; two-year tolling period due to incarceration); Canatella v. Van De Kamp, 486 F.3d 1128, 1132-33 (9th Cir. 2007) (forum state’s personal injury statute of limitations and tolling laws apply to § 1983 actions). The requirements for equitable tolling in California are time ly notice and lack of prejudice to the defendants, and good faith conduct on the part of the plaintiff. See Addison v. California, 21 Cal.3d 313 , 146 CaLRptr. 224, 578 P.2d 941, 943-44 (1978). Although California law generally prohibits equitable tolling for…