Butler v. City of Huntington Beach

Good Law
25 F. App'x 568
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 26, 2001No. 00-56701. D.C. No. CV-96-00517-GLTCalifornia565 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

John Butler appeals the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment as to his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims stemming from a police dog-bite incident. The district court held that the claims were time barred. Butler contends that the one-year statute of limitations, as applied to his federal claims, violated his right to equal protection. He also argues that defendants waived the statute of limitations or, alternatively, that they are equitably es-topped from asserting it. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. 1 Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Butler, we conclude that no genuine issue of material fact exists and that the district court properly applied the relevant substantive law. 2 We therefore affirm.

Because the facts are known to the parties, we do not recite them here. We do note that Butler’s suit was filed within six months of the denial of his state administrative claims but more than a year after the dog-bite incident from which his claims arose. We proceed to Butler’s arguments.

We find no equal protection problem with the application of California’s…

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.