Hajek

MEMORANDUM *

Hajek appeals summary judgment for defendant railroads on the ground that his claims were barred by the statute of limitations. The sole issue is whether Hajek should have reasonably suspected prior to July 17, 1993, that his chronic back condition was linked to the heavy lifting his job with the railroads required.

Claims based upon medical injury accrue when the plaintiff has actual or constructive knowledge of his injury and its cause. Urie v. Thompson, 337 U.S. 163, 170 , 69 S.Ct. 1018 , 93 L.Ed. 1282 (1949); Winter v. United States, 244 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir.2001). Hajek’s knowledge of his injury prior to July 1993 is beyond dispute. Two different chiropractors reached a tentative diagnosis of degenerative disc disease prior to 1993, and an X-ray confirmed the diagnosis. Dr. Gardner testified that in 1992 he explained to Hajek both the X-ray findings and his diagnosis. Hajek did not rebut this testimony.

The only question, therefore, is whether Hajek should have suspected his back problem was linked to his work. It is common knowledge that lifting heavy objects can cause back problems, and Hajek’s job involved a lot of heavy lifting. Dr. Miller, who was the…