James Lee Percy v. San Francisco General Hospital City and County of San Francisco

Good Law
841 F.2d 975·1988 WL 19281·10 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 535·46 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 37,878·46 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 566
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 10, 198887-1849California2,510 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thompson, J.

James Lee Percy appeals from the district court’s dismissal of his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against San Francisco General Hospital and the City and County of San Francisco (collectively referred to as “City”). Percy stated his section 1983 claim in a first amended complaint filed after the statute of limitations had run. The district court determined that the 1983 claim did not “relate back” to the date Percy filed his original complaint. The original complaint set forth only one claim based upon Percy’s alleged wrongful termi nation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq. The district court concluded that under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(c) the section 1983 claim did not arise from the same “conduct, transaction or occurrence” that formed the basis of Percy’s Title VII claim, and dismissed the 1983 claim as time barred.

We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

The San Francisco General Hospital, which is operated by the City and County of San Francisco, employed James Lee Percy as an institutional police officer. Percy was fired in May 1983 after his supervisor received…

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.