Poole

Poole v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
41 F. App'x 60
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 1, 2002No. 01-56075; D.C. No. CV-00-10329-SVWCalifornia1,547 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Russell Poole challenges the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants the City of Los Angeles and Bernard C. Parks, Chief of Police of the Los Angeles Police Department (“defendants”), issued on the ground that his claims were barred by the statute of limitations. Poole also appeals the district court’s denial of his request for additional discovery. Because the parties are familiar with the facts of the case, we recount them here only to the extent necessary to explain our rulings.

DISCUSSION

I. Statute of Limitations

Actions brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 are governed by the forum state’s statute of limitations for personal injury actions. Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 276 , 105 S.Ct. 1938 , 85 L.Ed.2d 254 (1985). In California, the statute of limitations for personal injury actions is one year. Knox v. Davis, 260 F.3d 1009, 1013 (9th Cir.2001). As Poole filed the instant lawsuit on September 26, 2000, events pri- or to September 26, 1999 are barred by the statute of limitations.

Almost all of the events that Poole claims give rise to his Section 1983 claims occurred well prior to September 26, 1999.…

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.