Rigg

Rigg v. California

Good Law
32 F. App'x 398
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 20, 2002No. 00-17371; D.C. No. CV-97-02084-DFLCalifornia2,320 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The facts are well-known to the parties and will be repeated only so far as necessary to explain our decision. William Steven Rigg (“Rigg”), a former California corrections officer, filed suit in November *400 1997 and the bulk of his claims occurred before November 1996. As a general matter, Rigg’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims against (now-retired) Warden George A. Smith (“Smith” or ‘Warden Smith”) would be time-barred by the one year limitations period for claims arising in California. See De Anza Properties X. Ltd. v. County of Santa Cruz, 936 F.2d 1084, 1085 (9th Cir. 1991). It is Rigg’s burden to establish that an exception applies to the limitations period.

As to Rigg’s claims against Warden Smith, and only Warden Smith, Rigg has established an exception under the doctrine of equitable tolling. Rigg’s first workers compensation claim, filed on October 21, 1994, allows the statute of limitations to toll on his § 1983 claims. Under California law, tolling is permitted if Rigg had several legal remedies and reasonably and in good faith chose not to pursue all of them simultaneously. However, he must also show that there was “ ‘timely notice, and lack of prejudice, to…

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.