Charles Leonard Elliott v. City of Union City

Caution
25 F.3d 800·94 Daily Journal DAR 7313·1994 WL 229786·1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 12538·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3925
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 1, 199492-16036California1,929 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

Opinion by Judge REINHARDT.

The issue before us is whether the California disability statute, Cal.Civ.Proc. Code § 352(a)(3), tolls the statute of limitations when a plaintiff, suing under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to recover for injuries suffered during an arrest, is held in continuous custody from the time of that arrest through the period of his incarceration following his conviction. Plaintiff Charles Elliott appeals pro se the district court’s judgment in favor of defendants Union City, the Union City Police Chief, and members of the Union City Police Department. The district court granted defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding that Elliott’s claim that Union City police officers used excessive force in arresting him was barred by the applicable statute of limitations. Because we hold that § 352(a)(3) tolls the limitations period when the plaintiff has been in continuous custody, commencing at the time of his arrest, we reverse and remand to the district court for further proceedings.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In 1985, after a domestic dispute, Elliott was arrested and charged with two felony counts of battery on a police officer, and was held in continuous…

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.